It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
Finally reversing some of the changes that red Tory, Attlee, made to ensure the NHS was affordable. Whatever happened to him? Was he asked to f%%# off and join the Tories?
Edit - More seriously anyone proposing this has to explain why the £450m isn’t better spent on [insert popular NHS funding cause here].
His son joined the SDP, and his grandson is a Tory!
It's always seemed strange that there is a charge for dentistry but not for other operations.
It’s a choice. We ration most NHS care by waiting list. We have an NHS rate for dentistry that sees it rationed by cost instead. Remember we do have that NHS rate.
You could make dentistry “free”. Or glasses. Or prescriptions. But what else are you not going to fund with those marginal pounds.
Finally reversing some of the changes that red Tory, Attlee, made to ensure the NHS was affordable. Whatever happened to him? Was he asked to f%%# off and join the Tories?
Edit - More seriously anyone proposing this has to explain why the £450m isn’t better spent on [insert popular NHS funding cause here].
His son joined the SDP, and his grandson is a Tory!
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
Fortunately for the Government while Tony Blair had very high net satisfaction ratings, Jeremy Corbyn has the worst ratings for any leader of the opposition since WW2
It's always seemed strange that there is a charge for dentistry but not for other operations.
It’s a choice. We ration most NHS care by waiting list. We have an NHS rate for dentistry that sees it rationed by cost instead. Remember we do have that NHS rate.
You could make dentistry “free”. Or glasses. Or prescriptions. But what else are you not going to fund with those marginal pounds.
I think we've long passed the point where Labour care about funding issues, don't you?
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
Next up: free tyre checks.
Free hearing aids would be better. I’ve been entitled to them for years but the bastards in my LHA refuse to pay for them.
FPT - one of the most insightful things @Richard_Nabavi said after the last election (and he says a lot of insightful things) is to bear in mind the very wide margins of error in predicting seat totals.
Imagine how tense you'll be feeling at 10pm on Thursday 12th December, as we're poised on the edge of our seats waiting for the exit poll.. It wouldn't take a huge amount to go from:
*BONG* CONSERVATIVES LARGEST PARTY... 305 seats.. to..
*BONG* CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY... 365 seats.
There could be an error of +/- 30 seats (or more) in either which way you predict it around your central forecast, and that is affecting my betting this year.
It's much flatter than you think.
I was wondering just before the last election if it's actually flat at all. It's possible that it's bi- or even multi-modal, with the modes reflecting different underlying "states" and the pollsters trying to guess which "state" we're in. For example, this election, a state in which previous Labour voters will ultimately hold their noses and vote for the party again is separate to one in which they will vote Lib Dem/Brexit en masse.
Part of the reason the pollsters have been having trouble recently could be just that their key assumption of normally distributed error around a central observation simply isn't appropriate any more.
There probably are these states as you are claiming such as labour voters in Lab/Con seats and Labour Voters in CON/LD seats, but in reality there will be quite a lot of states and different voters will belong to different states. The overall averaging out of many bimodal distributions gives something that is roughly normally distributed with heavier tails.
Yeah, that's the theory. I'm wondering if it's not actually the case in practice that the "true" position is not well modelled by a poll with a standard error around it.
That is one thing I will not be hoping for. Unlike the last two elections in my ultra marginal I will not be voting for a party tainted by anti semitism
Jolly good Mike. Please vote CON. Please.
Ain't too proud to beg 😊
The party tainted by islamophobia?
I can understand not voting for Labour because of anti-Semitism, but to vote for a party that has its own racism problems and lead by a man who has said some literally racist things, I find bizarre.
I think the problem is genuinely just Corbyn and his immediate colleagues. Probably no more then 3 or 4 people.
This group spent 30 odd years being regarded as the most extreme of left wingers in Parliament. They did all the things expected of the far left - consorting with terrorists, taking the side of clear enemies of Britain against our country, advocating far left economic and social policies. They have written their own script for 30 years with no regard for popularity because they genuinely never believed they would get close to power.
Now they are in power they have cemented these reputations with further extremist positions and with pandering to a few (and I am sure it is only a few) anti-semites in their party.
Basically people are not as dumb as politicians expect them to be and they don't believe Corbyn has just cast off a lifetime of extremism.
Against any other Labour leader, even if only slightly less left wing than Corbyn, Boris would be completely screwed. But this is where we are now and until Corbyn and his clique are gone, people will always opt for the relative safety of the Tories even when led by an intellectual vacuum like Johnson.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
Assume 45m have teeth (excluding babies and the gummy elderly) - that's £10 a year. They are going to have to take about 90 secs a time.....
"Yup, you still have some teeth. Now, book over there for several thousand pounds worth of treatment...."
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
Edit: I don’t think you don’t know this, but non-teachers sometimes have a fuzzy idea of how much work the average teacher does.
I think there was a boo-boo with the password system. Managed to reset mine last night, but others may have fared less well.
Indeed. Did mine without issue this morning but I've not seen an explanation why these password resets have been forced - has there been some kind of data 'issue' at PB Towers? Maybe Mike or Robert could advise?
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education. The idea that collective bargaining could be imposed on the financial and professional services sectors is completely bonkers.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home has "almost entirely disappeared" from the private sector??
Not in banking it hasn't. Away from the branches it was rife a couple of years ago when I retired and I suspect it's only grown since then, partly encouraged by the banks' desire to save office costs through hot-desking.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
Assume 45m have teeth (excluding babies and the gummy elderly) - that's £10 a year. They are going to have to take about 90 secs a time.....
"Yup, you still have some teeth. Now, book over there for several thousand pounds worth of treatment...."
Aiui there are vast tracts of the country with a shortage of NHS dentists, so this might be a more popular policy than many on here expect, but simultaneously harder to deliver.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
Good question - I was assuming they were included.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
They may well do for all I know: I work in a state school.
That is one thing I will not be hoping for. Unlike the last two elections in my ultra marginal I will not be voting for a party tainted by anti semitism
Jolly good Mike. Please vote CON. Please.
Ain't too proud to beg 😊
The party tainted by islamophobia?
I can understand not voting for Labour because of anti-Semitism, but to vote for a party that has its own racism problems and lead by a man who has said some literally racist things, I find bizarre.
I think the problem is genuinely just Corbyn and his immediate colleagues. Probably no more then 3 or 4 people.
This group spent 30 odd years being regarded as the most extreme of left wingers in Parliament. They did all the things expected of the far left - consorting with terrorists, taking the side of clear enemies of Britain against our country, advocating far left economic and social policies. They have written their own script for 30 years with no regard for popularity because they genuinely never believed they would get close to power.
Now they are in power they have cemented these reputations with further extremist positions and with pandering to a few (and I am sure it is only a few) anti-semites in their party.
Basically people are not as dumb as politicians expect them to be and they don't believe Corbyn has just cast off a lifetime of extremism.
Against any other Labour leader, even if only slightly less left wing than Corbyn, Boris would be completely screwed. But this is where we are now and until Corbyn and his clique are gone, people will always opt for the relative safety of the Tories even when led by an intellectual vacuum like Johnson.
That’s one of those counterfactuals though. Without Corbyn I’m pretty confident that the referendum would have we would have gone the other way. Cameron wouldn’t have gone, May would be a large footnote (perhaps she still will be), Johnson might still be there but in a different way and Britain would be a different place. People here blame Cameron for the referendum and it’s result but Beckett and Milliband junior are not short of responsIbility. It’s just not so direct.
In short, if we didn’t have Corbyn, I doubt there would be an election right now.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education. The idea that collective bargaining could be imposed on the financial and professional services sectors is completely bonkers.
“Great news! We’ve negotiated a 7% deal over two years for all financial services staff! The Gvt has guaranteed it will apply to all staff in all firms by law. This a major victory for all call centre and branch staff”.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
Yes
I’ll take your word for it as you would clearly know more about it than me.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
Yep. As a contractor I do probably three quarters of my work from home logging on directly into the client's secure network. It is very much the norm for may people these days.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
These days I notice this is how dentists "up-sell". They do the check-up and with an incredible regularity suggest you 100% definitely need them cleaning, and now you have to pay another £40 for a lower-paid, lower qualified technician to do it.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
Yes
I’ll take your word for it as you would clearly know more about it than me.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
These days I notice this is how dentists "up-sell". They do the check-up and with an incredible regularity suggest you 100% definitely need them cleaning, and now you have to pay another £40 for a lower-paid, lower qualified technician to do it.
.. and you do need it if you have plaque. It will stuff you over time if not cleaned off.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state, is it secure? Reasonably but if you see them as evil then your assumptions change.
Labour always has very soft green support it can faithfully rely on to come onboard once an election is called.
Labour will squeeze them to around 1 or 2 percent I would think.
Tory vote in 2010 was 36%, Labour 29%, Lib Dems 23%.
Where have those Lib Dems gone?
There was a YouGov poll that indicated that 40% of Greens would vote tactically for Labour and 40% for LDs leaving 20% (of 5%) i.e. 1% still voting Green. That's what I have in my model.
The movement has already started and Greens are now on about 3.5% and the shift of the other 1.5% is already reflected in the Lab and LD shares.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
These days I notice this is how dentists "up-sell". They do the check-up and with an incredible regularity suggest you 100% definitely need them cleaning, and now you have to pay another £40 for a lower-paid, lower qualified technician to do it.
I have taken to overstating a minor heart condition. It scares the dentist out of up-selling unnecessary procedures.
Labour always has very soft green support it can faithfully rely on to come onboard once an election is called.
Labour will squeeze them to around 1 or 2 percent I would think.
Tory vote in 2010 was 36%, Labour 29%, Lib Dems 23%.
Where have those Lib Dems gone?
There was a YouGov poll that indicated that 40% of Greens would vote tactically for Labour and 40% for LDs leaving 20% (of 5%) i.e. 1% still voting Green. That's what I have in my model.
The movement has already started and Greens are now on about 3.5% and the shift of the other 1.5% is already reflected in the Lab and LD shares.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
That is one thing I will not be hoping for. Unlike the last two elections in my ultra marginal I will not be voting for a party tainted by anti semitism
Jolly good Mike. Please vote CON. Please.
Ain't too proud to beg 😊
The party tainted by islamophobia?
I can understand not voting for Labour because of anti-Semitism, but to vote for a party that has its own racism problems and lead by a man who has said some literally racist things, I find bizarre.
I think the problem is genuinely just Corbyn and his immediate colleagues. Probably no more then 3 or 4 people.
This group spent 30 odd years being regarded as the most extreme of left wingers in Parliament. They did all the things expected of the far left - consorting with terrorists, taking the side of clear enemies of Britain against our country, advocating far left economic and social policies. They have written their own script for 30 years with no regard for popularity because they genuinely never believed they would get close to power.
Now they are in power they have cemented these reputations with further extremist positions and with pandering to a few (and I am sure it is only a few) anti-semites in their party.
Basically people are not as dumb as politicians expect them to be and they don't believe Corbyn has just cast off a lifetime of extremism.
Against any other Labour leader, even if only slightly less left wing than Corbyn, Boris would be completely screwed. But this is where we are now and until Corbyn and his clique are gone, people will always opt for the relative safety of the Tories even when led by an intellectual vacuum like Johnson.
That’s one of those counterfactuals though. Without Corbyn I’m pretty confident that the referendum would have we would have gone the other way. Cameron wouldn’t have gone, May would be a large footnote (perhaps she still will be), Johnson might still be there but in a different way and Britain would be a different place. People here blame Cameron for the referendum and it’s result but Beckett and Milliband junior are not short of responsIbility. It’s just not so direct.
In short, if we didn’t have Corbyn, I doubt there would be an election right now.
Probably right although I am not convinced Corbyn made that much difference in that particular case. But I was looking at things more from the question of where we are now and what needs to be done to produce a viable opposition again.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
Google won’t operate in the UK under Corbyn.
Really?
Not if it has to pay tax. We all know Google has Views on paying tax.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
I think if you had more people having their teeth checked/cleaned more often there'd be less need for the expensive stuff (still a need, I grant you).
How? Checking doesn’t clean them.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
These days I notice this is how dentists "up-sell". They do the check-up and with an incredible regularity suggest you 100% definitely need them cleaning, and now you have to pay another £40 for a lower-paid, lower qualified technician to do it.
.. and you do need it if you have plaque. It will stuff you over time if not cleaned off.
I know that. But there is definitely a push on up selling that service. A few years ago I moved. About 2 months before I moved, I got a check up and them cleaned.
Registered with a new dentist and they insisted I had to have a check-up. Shock horror they said I need them cleaning. I said thanks but no thanks. Went back 6 months later, again, you need them cleaning they claimed.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education.
Huh?! Surely that’s a spoof remark?!!!!!
Sorry, I suspect we're talking at crossed purposes. My private sector job allows me to work one day a week from home without any request for permission. As a class teacher, my assumption is that if you have classes five days a week, you have to turn up to school five days a week. Similarly it's next to impossible for doctors/nurses to oversee patients remotely. Obviously admin work etc can and is routinely done at home, but there are things for which a physical presence is necessary. In my case, I can theoretically work from home for weeks without any impact on my performance.
Labour always has very soft green support it can faithfully rely on to come onboard once an election is called.
Labour will squeeze them to around 1 or 2 percent I would think.
Tory vote in 2010 was 36%, Labour 29%, Lib Dems 23%.
Where have those Lib Dems gone?
There was a YouGov poll that indicated that 40% of Greens would vote tactically for Labour and 40% for LDs leaving 20% (of 5%) i.e. 1% still voting Green. That's what I have in my model.
The movement has already started and Greens are now on about 3.5% and the shift of the other 1.5% is already reflected in the Lab and LD shares.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education.
Huh?! Surely that’s a spoof remark?!!!!!
Sorry, I suspect we're talking at crossed purposes. My private sector job allows me to work one day a week from home without any request for permission. As a class teacher, my assumption is that if you have classes five days a week, you have to turn up to school five days a week. Similarly it's next to impossible for doctors/nurses to oversee patients remotely. Obviously admin work etc can and is routinely done at home, but there are things for which a physical presence is necessary. In my case, I can theoretically work from home for weeks without any impact on my performance.
Now you explain, that does make more sense. Thanks.
It’s not the checks that are the problem. Getting the teeth checked is cheap and quick. Getting the fecking treatment done is the expensive bit. And that’s speaking as somebody on a good salary who doesn’t eat many sugary foods.
Assume 45m have teeth (excluding babies and the gummy elderly) - that's £10 a year. They are going to have to take about 90 secs a time.....
"Yup, you still have some teeth. Now, book over there for several thousand pounds worth of treatment...."
Aiui there are vast tracts of the country with a shortage of NHS dentists, so this might be a more popular policy than many on here expect, but simultaneously harder to deliver.
The money is massively too little to make this policy work.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
Google won’t operate in the UK under Corbyn.
I’ve seen an estimate of the economic worth of Google (ie the search engine) at $18,000 per person. I’m not sure I believe that number and no reference was given, and I know other search engines are available but losing it would not be good.
Probably right although I am not convinced Corbyn made that much difference in that particular case. But I was looking at things more from the question of where we are now and what needs to be done to produce a viable opposition again.
The opposition is viable in the sense that people here believe that Labour can win. They are polling, what, 30% ish. That their flaws are apparent doesn’t make them unviable. Undesirable, perhaps. But they are not Labour. They are the SWP (and the various Trotskyist groupuscles) so why would they let go. 30%,even in failure, is more than the CPGB etc could ever hope to achieve.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
According to Opinium, the Tories have stretched their poll lead and now have a 16-point lead over Labour. The Conservatives are up three points compared with a week ago, and now stand on 44%. Labour is down one point on 28%. The Liberal Democrats are also down one point on 14%, their lowest showing since August, while the Brexit party is unchanged on 6%.
Tories +3 Labour -1 Lib Dem -1
That just doesn't feel right at all.
Who did they survey only the local Conservative Clubs?
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Teachers have been working at home for ages. Most do it as well as working at school of course, although I like the idea of supervising an A-Level controlled practical via Skype.
I could probably teach the way I do over Skype. And of course I do a lot of work at home as otherwise I would never be there.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
We use Google meetings for work. But Google is an enemy of the state,
Google won’t operate in the UK under Corbyn.
I’ve seen an estimate of the economic worth of Google (ie the search engine) at $18,000 per person. I’m not sure I believe that number and no reference was given, and I know other search engines are available but losing it would not be good.
You fully refute your own argument with the valid "other search engines are available" point.
>Labour will also promise a revolution in the labour market by introducing sectoral collective bargaining, promising a 32-hour working week by 2030 — albeit voluntary — and banning zero-hours contracts.
So actually quite moderate again. Interesting.
Sectoral collective bargaining isn't moderate.
I don’t even know how you get there from the current status quo where many (most?) people are not in unions.
I’m a union rep (though very definitely don’t fund Labour) and regularly see the benefits of collective bargaining in an employer; but there won’t be many sectors where unions can argue for the same “buy in” for the whole sector as with an employer in which they are recognised.
They can in the public sector.
Which is the point, really. This policy and the working directive appears to be a function of Labour’s support being almost entirely public sector where such things as short working, working from home and sectoral bargaining are normal. In the private sector, where they have almost entirely disappeared after Wapping in 1986, they will simply be laughed at.
Working from home is now pretty much normal in large chunks of the private sector as well. And I guess it's almost nonexistent amongst large sections of the public sector, eg health and education.
Huh?! Surely that’s a spoof remark?!!!!!
Sorry, I suspect we're talking at crossed purposes. My private sector job allows me to work one day a week from home without any request for permission. As a class teacher, my assumption is that if you have classes five days a week, you have to turn up to school five days a week. Similarly it's next to impossible for doctors/nurses to oversee patients remotely. Obviously admin work etc can and is routinely done at home, but there are things for which a physical presence is necessary. In my case, I can theoretically work from home for weeks without any impact on my performance.
Now you explain, that does make more sense. Thanks.
My private sector job for a mahoosive global company is 99.99 per cent working from home, thus saving the company paying for electricity, chairs, stationery, and all that other gubbins, not to mention great big buildings.
Try and get an NHS dentist, its virtually impossible. I pay 27£ a month for 4 hygienist and 2 dentist appts and any treatment req is free under certain conditions.. but not for crowns or root canal and the like. It also covers me when abroad..
Letting low skilled E.U migrants come here only with a job offerer is simply not tight enough, many employers will simply advertise in E.U countries and then hire them over the phone/internet.
And not being able to claim benefits for 5 years will hardly make a dent.
It looks like neither party wants to control immigration, but for different reasons.
There's an opening for Nigel Farrage there if Boris is not careful. 😮
Labour always has very soft green support it can faithfully rely on to come onboard once an election is called.
Labour will squeeze them to around 1 or 2 percent I would think.
Tory vote in 2010 was 36%, Labour 29%, Lib Dems 23%.
Where have those Lib Dems gone?
There was a YouGov poll that indicated that 40% of Greens would vote tactically for Labour and 40% for LDs leaving 20% (of 5%) i.e. 1% still voting Green. That's what I have in my model.
The movement has already started and Greens are now on about 3.5% and the shift of the other 1.5% is already reflected in the Lab and LD shares.
The Tories are never getting 44%. I can't see them getting 40%.
The big difference in so many of these polls is the Labour number. They are either looking at a sub Gordo drubbing or a now creeping to a respectable 32-33% share.
I think the later is much more likely than the former. In fact the former is just impossible, especially with Santa Corbyn handing out freebies left, right and centre.
Letting low skilled E.U migrants come here only with a job offerer is simply not tight enough, many employers will simply advertise in E.U countries and then hire them over the phone/internet.
And not being able to claim benefits for 5 years will hardly make a dent.
It looks like neither party wants to control immigration, but for different reasons.
There's an opening for Nigel Farrage there if Boris is not careful. 😮
If it is no access to in work benefits, I think it will make a large difference.
Comments
You could make dentistry “free”. Or glasses. Or prescriptions. But what else are you not going to fund with those marginal pounds.
A free scale and polish would help, if included. Is it?
This group spent 30 odd years being regarded as the most extreme of left wingers in Parliament. They did all the things expected of the far left - consorting with terrorists, taking the side of clear enemies of Britain against our country, advocating far left economic and social policies. They have written their own script for 30 years with no regard for popularity because they genuinely never believed they would get close to power.
Now they are in power they have cemented these reputations with further extremist positions and with pandering to a few (and I am sure it is only a few) anti-semites in their party.
Basically people are not as dumb as politicians expect them to be and they don't believe Corbyn has just cast off a lifetime of extremism.
Against any other Labour leader, even if only slightly less left wing than Corbyn, Boris would be completely screwed. But this is where we are now and until Corbyn and his clique are gone, people will always opt for the relative safety of the Tories even when led by an intellectual vacuum like Johnson.
"Yup, you still have some teeth. Now, book over there for several thousand pounds worth of treatment...."
Edit: I don’t think you don’t know this, but non-teachers sometimes have a fuzzy idea of how much work the average teacher does.
But in the private sector, do they have the same infrastructure as, say, the MoD which allows secure private networks for their staff?
Not in banking it hasn't. Away from the branches it was rife a couple of years ago when I retired and I suspect it's only grown since then, partly encouraged by the banks' desire to save office costs through hot-desking.
In short, if we didn’t have Corbyn, I doubt there would be an election right now.
“But I’m an analyst on the trading side”.
“So?”
“I’ll send you a postcard from Zurich”.
What about sectoral bargaining and short hours?
Plus add in all the teeth health tourists.
That figure won’t last the night.
The movement has already started and Greens are now on about 3.5% and the shift of the other 1.5% is already reflected in the Lab and LD shares.
Oh, sorry, I went off early.
Registered with a new dentist and they insisted I had to have a check-up. Shock horror they said I need them cleaning. I said thanks but no thanks. Went back 6 months later, again, you need them cleaning they claimed.
https://www.money.co.uk/guides/nhs-dentist-charges-are-you-paying-too-much.htm
16 points with this lot.
>Conservatives are up three points compared with a week ago, and now stand on 44%. Labour is down one point on 28%.
Tories +3
Labour -1
Lib Dem -1
That just doesn't feel right at all.
Who did they survey only the local Conservative Clubs?
Letting low skilled E.U migrants come here only with a job offerer is simply not tight enough, many employers will simply advertise in E.U countries and then hire them over the phone/internet.
And not being able to claim benefits for 5 years will hardly make a dent.
It looks like neither party wants to control immigration, but for different reasons.
There's an opening for Nigel Farrage there if Boris is not careful. 😮
Con/Lab/LD 320/225/32
The big difference in so many of these polls is the Labour number. They are either looking at a sub Gordo drubbing or a now creeping to a respectable 32-33% share.
I think the later is much more likely than the former. In fact the former is just impossible, especially with Santa Corbyn handing out freebies left, right and centre.