Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chronicle of a bet foretold Part 2
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chronicle of a bet foretold Part 2
It is 11am on September 21st 2019 as I write this. Earlier in the year I wrote an article about fixed-odds betting used to insure against political risk. I finished by saying I would investigate other modes, specifically currency conversion. This is that investigation.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
However I can't see any political markets on their website. Can anyone provide a link?
In contrast, all of Sporting Index's GE markets are listed on one page which was linked in a thread header a few weeks ago.
It has belatedly dawned on the government that this is a disaster waiting to happen because sooner or later, one of the umpteen places now holding copies of our passports will leak them.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/19/warning-uploading-copies-passport-online-government-launches/
Quite what the answer is, aside from backdoor attempts to create a central ID repository, who knows?
So they hedged their bets by buying USD before the vote, so they wouldn't lose (apart from conversion costs) either way.
https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1175646068589170688?s=21
With peer-to-peer systems, there's no reliance on identity (since this doesn't work on the internet), and no operator who is required to operate them in a broken way on behalf of the government.
https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249
If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.
I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-jeremy-corbyn-laura-pidcock_uk_5d823f62e4b0957256af7be6
Not that the interviewer's bizarre claims about OFSTED are any better.
Not just the past week, come to that. And especially not the part that needed the EU not to read British newspapers where Boris had explained he was bluffing.
One thing that was clear was that Boris was desperate for a snap general election before Brexit, before its adverse consequences became apparent to voters.
Beyond that, who knows? I am not sure Boris, Dominic Cummings (and presumably Lynton Crosby) have the same hymn sheet.
Boris needs a Jeremy Corbyn-led, minority Labour government for a couple of weeks to revoke or extend Article 50, then call the election which Boris can then fight as the champion of the people against the Establishment because right now, the millionaire, Old Etonian, Oxford-educated prime minister is the Establishment, and worse, he'd have lied to the people.
F1: Ricciardo disqualified for power breach. Not sure if he starts at the back of the grid or the pit lane.
Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.
I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?
A Corbyn government (rather than Labour government with Corbyn as PM) would be a very different matter but I see no prospect of it happening.
Edit: Obviously there would be an overlap but Tom was appealing to different groups then and now.
Secondly, currency movements are much more complicated than most of us have the time or ability to comprehend. So again using the $ as an example it has a safe haven status which means when things like the Saudi oil attacks occur it tends to strengthen. To assume that Sterling will move "because of Brexit" ignores many other factors that influence its rating every day. The Brexit effect may be large enough to overwhelm these other effects but it may not.
Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.
Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.
I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.
Do people not want their schools inspected?
Abolishing OFSTED is LD policy too:
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1175520961434718209?s=19
The CQC could do with similar treatment. It combines superficiality and intrusive officious box ticking much like OFSTED.
Where I have very strong reservations about this policy is that I think once you burrow down to the detail the implication is it will be reformed rather than abolished. Most of its functions would go to LEAs. Well, LEAs are pretty well gutted out right now, but even when they were strong they were so corrupt and incompetent that nothing ever got changed except the size of administrators' salaries. So that would not be a positive step. And then this 'back stop' inspection team is just another name for OFSTED.
Putting real reform in place would be tough because unfortunately there is no perfect way of inspecting schools. But this is Blairite style over substance - again. It would make matters worse, not better.
Yes, sounds like he'll be welcomed into a close knit team running Corbyn's campaign assuming none of them bear grudges (and that certainly isn't the Milne/Momentum way - very forgiving, collegiate folk by all accounts).
My golden rules on this matter are (1) Keep it Simple and (2) Go where the transaction cost is smallest.
This means, on the whole, and if there is a relevant market, use Betfair Exchange.
I manage my own 6 figure equity savings, and moved my portfolio into cash, defensive stocks, and those earning in forex in the spring of 2016. I bought some bargains back in the summer at a 15-20% off their pre-vote prices. I made 5 figure nominal profits.
I am following the same strategy now, wary too of the worldwide risks of recession. There aren't many bargains about any longer, as clearly I am not the only one thinking like this. I think the risk is now priced in, though there will be movement if the risk becomes manifest.
I would caution anyone not to take investment advice off an anonymous physician on t'internet!
I bet the Brexiteers who wanted rid of the Tory rebels are gutted they had someone so forgiving like Cummings and Boris in charge rather than someone like Corbyn who instantly expels people who vote against the Labour whip regardless of members views.
The fault with Corbyn is he is far too forgiving, going all the way to current Tory levels would be ridiculous but there is a balance.
Feel free to use your own words in response.
*Taking Labour anti-semitism seriously is Watsons other crime of course.
What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?
Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.
Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.
Do you think?
Watson is interested in fighting the leadership, this damages the party, removing his platform reduces the damage he can do.
As someone who signed the 2nd referendum petition and the revoke petition (although the wording and timing was an important part of that) I want rid of Tom Watson because it makes it more likely we do get a 2nd referendum and avoid no deal. People don't dislike Watson because he wants a 2nd referendum, the vast majority of the party do, they dislike him because he harms the party and increases the chance of Conservative government.
It is telling that many of Watsons fans (or those cheering him on in this circumstance) are those that do not wish Labour well. It is pretty obvious Labour members would not be part of that group.
*TBH Lansman going for Watson is almost certainly anti semitism related.
Well has he or hasn't he?
This logic drives you down the path of trying to assess the value added by the teacher which in turn drives something like our current assessment regime. Given @ydoethur's reservations this seems not to work but exam results are not the answer either.
https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1175527853649252353?s=19
The currency level of sterling, relative to your Deal and No Deal targets, would imply a No Deal probability of 40-50%, whereas the betting markets are putting it around 20%.
Since parliament "took control," the pound has gained about 4 cents against the dollar, and the implied probability of No Deal on the betting markets has halved.
There's something out of kilter somewhere in these figures, but who knows what?
Most importantly, viewcode touches upon the importance of managing your emotions in betting, which is just as crucial as applying your judgement and analysis if you want to make a profit.
It's saying what Labour members - very many of them strong Corbyn supporters - is Labour's Brexit policy mess and NOT Watson's place in the Party (even those who rather dislike him).
Meanwhile Corbyn and his lieutenants have been focussed on the factional battle, not the key policy question - the most important in recent political history.
I am sure that you are right. "Not supporting the leader" is the Corbynite euphemism for tackling anti-semitism and entryism in the Labour Party.
Hopeless fawning.
Do they?
Usually when surveyed and asked specifically members would say they backed the current policy (at the time) whilst simultaneously Corbyn's opponents would scream at him that he was going against what Labour members want. The truth is Corbyn's opponents want Corbyn gone which the Labour members don't want, so the argument about this being on behalf of the members is plainly ridiculous.
Labour policy will get decided at conference if there is disagreement by the members it will be changed, it was the members which set the Labour policy for the last year. There does seem to be, perhaps deliberate confusion between what people voted for in 2016, what they might like to happen in the end and what Labour members are actually happy with Labour policy being.
A Labour member who voted remain and wanted a second referendum for a while and thinks remain would be the best option (me) would somehow be roped in as a Labour member supporting Watson over Corbyn. Which is clearly wrong. Labour members thinking remain is the best outcome should not be confused with supporting Watson or being angry at Labours current Brexit policy.
Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.
Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.
It’s popular with some teachers....
Not many parents..
If anything remain supporters have more on the line, do they really want to lose a second referendum to satisfy Watson's ego trip.
You probably have a point, clearly Lansman attacked Watson as he didn't feel he was sufficiently anti semitic.
Watching from afar, it would be vaguely amusing to try and watch Junker construct a physical border against the wishes of everyone living both sides of it.
Labour and the Lib Dems don’t like them for similar but slightly different reasons.
Labour hate them because the Corbynites hate choice and want to bring schools back under state control again. The Unions detest them too because such reports can influence things like performance related pay through highlighting which schools are failing, which affects their members.
The Lib Dems don’t like them because lecturers and teachers traditionally form a large part of their activist base, who dress to the centre-left. They’re not too bothered about the ideology of state control of schools but think people like them should be calling the shots, and certainly don’t want to be held accountable for failure.
As usual with making children the battleground in politics, pupils will be the losers.
I use Betfair exchange for at least 80% of my bets, because I have full control anytime anyplace.
My other tip: only bet on what you know and understand. It’s far too easy to get impulsively sucked in by the sparkle of someone else’s tip, only to be left high and dry later when you realise you didn’t understand.
NOT THAT ONE !!!
They don’t want their failures revealed.
Most schools get 1 day of inspection every three years or so, and all sorts of nasties (especially temporarily removing pupils from the school roll to massage the figures) went on for years, even under Wilshaw. Generating spreadsheets to impress inspectors is a huge drain of time and morality (cos they're Malcolm Tuckeresqe exercises in spin).
If you want reliable frequent inspection, it's going to cost a lot more than Ofsted currently does.
Taking back control means that it's up to us what we do at the border. If the EU wish to build a fence across Ireland, then all I'll say is good luck to them, and especially good luck finding anyone who actually wants to work at the border itself.
LDs and Lab want teachers and schools to avoid scrutiny- no thanks.
See Scotland for an example of how things can go down the pan.
Emotions just get in the way.
#dalekwisdom
Choosing not to build a silly Brussels wall is taking back control.
Build and pay for your own Emerald curtain Jean Claude..
Following my rule, though, I don’t understand F1 so I don’t bet on it.
Does the inspection regime deliver sufficient value over and above that to justify its size and bureaucracy and cost? If no, consider dismantling it.
The EU knows they can't allow themselves to get salami-sliced like this, and that's why leveraging what London cares about, which is trade between the rest of the UK and the rest of the EU. Even if the UK decides to leave with No Deal, it still ends up coming back wanting a whole bunch of other things settled, and the EU is just going to say, "Legally-binding guarantees on the NI border or GTFO".
Does no one care that our PM is corrupt?
I'd take the fool any day .
F1: pre-race ramble, including a not very heroic tip:
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/09/singapore-pre-race-2019.html
Help!!!
They have been running it for 20 years. Enough time to make a real difference, one might think. An entire generation of school kids have been raised with Welsh Labour running their education.
Maybe if Labour had made an abundant success of Welsh education, I would be more optimistic about their plans for England.
In fact, Wales has always scored worse than England, Scotland & N Ireland in all PISA tests.
E.g., Science from Pisa in 2016:
13 England, 19 ROI, 23 NI, 24 Scotland, 34 Wales.
Of course these tables are not everything, but the picture is clear. England are ahead, RoI, Ni and Scotland bunched together behind England .... and then Wales last.
Would “cost” the Govt a bit of money though due to their “clever wheeze” of banking the interest paid on the bonds for the Treasury. They would suddenly have to start actually paying real interest on the debt!
Of course we sometimes found things that had gone wrong, but the object wasn't punitive, but positive.
You might need to be under 40 for the reference....
If his issue is with agricultural inspections, then let's agree that UK and RoI can station inspectors on the 'other' side of the border, checking shipments as they leave the originating farm.
The way the 'backstop' is designed, is to prevent the UK diverging in regulation *in anything* from the EU, preventing the UK signing trade deals with other countries and to allow the EU to have the upper hand in negotiations in the next stage, which they intend to drag on for as long as possible. Ireland, and the willing Varadkar, have been allowed to be used as pawns for the greater good of the EU Project, at considerable risk to their own economy. Junker is betting his life (and that of Varakdar) that the UK blinks first.
I can think a lot of local authorities would miraculously find that there aren’t any problems with their schools, and simply explain away any indicators such as poor exam results as consequences of low govt funding and/or the particular characteristics of their local areas.
And if at the occasional school they did, it would show up in exam results.
Exam results (for the same school over time) give a measure of how a school is doing. Do we need a bulky inspection bureaucracy over and above that? Not sure we do.