No. There is a small core of UKIP voters out there who are very unlikely to be moved.
I disagree. That implies a completely static view of a parties support when the polls all point to an ever higher kipper VI at local elections and likely the EU elections A base grows as general support grows. It's not all churn now. What used to be the base no longer is after breakthroughs and gains at a local election level. That base isn't rocketing up, but it's definitely going up slowly but surely the longer relatively high VI figures are maintained and improved upon.
Sorry - maybe I did not make myself very clear - I do not disagree with you that the Kipper vote goes up and down with elections and other events. What I meant was that there is a steady core below which UKIP will not fall and I agree with you that this core (or base) is gradually rising. In my experience it's quite unusual for voters to identify as anything other than Labour or Tory on the doorstep - even Lib Dems often tell canvassers that they are undecided (because identification with the Lib Dems as a party is usually quite weak). To find even a small number of voters who readily identify as UKIP is highly significant in my view - this suggests that UKIP does have a small but growing number of committed supporters who are very unlikely to change their allegiance this side of the general election.
''Personally I find this "we don't care if it takes until 2030 - we will do it our way " Kipper attitude as profoundly depressing.''
Kippers think there is no difference between labour/liberal/conservative. They don;t see a labour government as any different from a conservative one.
A labour government is just five more years of the same, to them, just like the coalition government has simply been a continuation of what has gone before.
The problem they have is if they can't co-opt some other political parties in a Euroref, they can't win it. So saying they're all the same means a go it alone strategy and certain defeat.
Sorry - maybe I did not make myself very clear - I do not disagree with you that the Kipper vote goes up and down with elections and other events. What I meant was that there is a steady core below which UKIP will not fall and I agree with you that this core (or base) is gradually rising. In my experience it's quite unusual for voters to identify as anything other than Labour or Tory on the doorstep - even Lib Dems often tell canvassers that they are undecided (because identification with the Lib Dems as a party is usually quite weak). To find even a small number of voters who readily identify as UKIP is highly significant in my view - this suggests that UKIP does have a small but growing number of committed supporters who are very unlikely to change their allegiance this side of the general election.
Yes, that's right. We had 17% LibDems at the last election, but we actually find more people spontaneously saying they're UKIP. Spontaneous Tories are getting fairly rare too, actually, though we get some "nah, not Labour" responses which could mean anyone.
"The euro area may have to wait for a change in the European Union’s founding treaties to get a permanent public backstop for its planned centralized bank-resolution authority, EU draft documents show"
The article envisages another Treaty "within the next 10 years".
Could be perfect timing for Ed.
Well, that's just a Lithuanian draft, but 2022ish sounds about right, if they start thinking about it seriously now. I don't think that anyone serious in the EU expects a treaty revision ready for voting before 2020. Lithuania just envisages having a treaty to confirm the arrangements formally after they've been working for most of a decade.
Might give UKIP a further boost in 2020, come to that.
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
Free movement of people and goods inside the EU was agreed at Maastricht in 1992 and implemented in the UK by a Conservative government, not under the last Labour government.
Not so, it was extended by the accession treaties and by Lisbon.
Ignoring the rights and wrongs of it, does anyone know how Mrs May's proposed 75,000 cap would work?
Would the 75,001 person be forced to wait until someone left the country? Would we distinguish between a French Goldman Sachs banker on a three month secondment and a Bulgarian plumber with no job in hand?
Would it be trailing 12 months, or would 1 January see 75,000 people arrive, followed by a year of closed borders? How would it deal with emigration? Does my pensioner heading for Malaga allow me an additional Pole?
Don't be silly, not even Mrs May knows that.
Its merely window dressing to look good to waivering tory voters temped by UKIP and tory MPs who might vote for her in a leadership contest.
@NickPalmer Might give UKIP a further boost in 2020, come to that.
What makes you think a Labour led government will keep to the 5 year statute, Nick? Would they not find it more flexible to repeal it, and so add another measure of power over the opposition?
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
People ALWAYS dislike closer rivals more. Perhaps it's a general human thing - don't we feel more rivalry with neighbours France than, say, the Czech Republic?
Free movement of people and goods inside the EU was agreed at Maastricht in 1992 and implemented in the UK by a Conservative government, not under the last Labour government.
Not so, it was extended by the accession treaties and by Lisbon.
The Single European Act (1986) wrote provisions into the Treaty of Rome to establish an area without frontiers and to abolish checks on persons at internal frontiers, irrespective of nationality. Unfortunately, this area was not established before the scheduled date of 31 December 1992. But in 1990 the Council, acting under the Single Act, extended the right of residence to persons who are not engaged in an occupation, provided they have sufficient resources and social insurance cover. The final stage in attaining the general right to movement and residence was its incorporation in the concept of Union citizenship in the Treaty on European Union (1992). In 1997 the Amsterdam Treaty produced a political solution for further progress on free movement, incorporating the Schengen Agreement into the Union Treaty (although some member states wanted to have special status and will retain controls at their border with other Member States).
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
Ignoring the rights and wrongs of it, does anyone know how Mrs May's proposed 75,000 cap would work?
Would the 75,001 person be forced to wait until someone left the country? Would we distinguish between a French Goldman Sachs banker on a three month secondment and a Bulgarian plumber with no job in hand?
Would it be trailing 12 months, or would 1 January see 75,000 people arrive, followed by a year of closed borders? How would it deal with emigration? Does my pensioner heading for Malaga allow me an additional Pole?
Don't be silly, not even Mrs May knows that.
Its merely window dressing to look good to waivering tory voters temped by UKIP and tory MPs who might vote for her in a leadership contest.
But its effect will be to boost UKIP. The first rule of immigration policy is that there are no votes in it for anyone except UKIP. UKIP can always outbid the Tories on this and it's very naive of the Tories to believe otherwise. IIRC the last poll that asked voters to name the best party on immigration produced a result something like UKIP 50%, Labour 20% the Tories 18%.
Not really surprising that tories are impotent to stop Farage since so many of them don't even understand the basics of what he wants.
Farage want's OUT of Europe. That's it. He isn't pinning everything on a Cast Iron referendum pledge from Cammie that he self-evidently believes is as worthless as Cammie's Lisbon Pledge.
Farage is more than happy to eventually force the tory party into a full blown official OUT position and what is more he is already having that effect against a weak tory leadership like Cameron's chumocracy.
Gove and Hammond would say No to Europe... and seven Cabinet colleagues including Duncan Smith privately agree
The pressure will only increase as Cammie will be forced to make ever more concessions to upset eurosceptics after the EU elections. That has been the pattern for this entire parliament and it won't stop now. Eurosceptic backbenchers forcing Cammie to capitulate on the EU and both running scared of Farage and the kippers.
A great strategy - which will see Labour win in 2015 and hence we will probably be even deeper in Europe.
To me it suggests old Nigel really doesn't want a Con victory either way - he can lord it up from his high horse if Labour win.
Nigel and UKIP believes the Tories with their business connections will never leave the EU. That is why it is their historic mission to repalce the Conservative Party.
Personally I find this "we don't care if it takes until 2030 - we will do it our way " Kipper attitude as profoundly depressing.How many of UKIP's current supporters will still be with us in 2030?
Congrats on the offer, Mr. Max. Sadly, I've no advice to offer but I'm sure one or two chaps here can offer some experienced views on the sort of work you'd be doing.
How much do you enjoy your current work, and how good is it in financial terms [vaguely, of course]?
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
Max, I worked in equity research at Goldman Sachs, and after that at a boutique. If you want a chat, by email is my username at gmail dot com
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
@Southam - Sure, but the accession treaties were new. The UK could have said 'No thanks' or 'No thanks unless...' at that point. The UK could also have refused to ratify Lisbon until the creeping extension of the original 'Free movement of workers' had been corrected (See for example the 2004 Directive 2004/38/EC, and ECJ judgements such as Martinez Sala and Levin).
The time to get this right was, obviously, before ratifying Lisbon, and before agreeing to the accession treaties.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
The Cameroons are pretty determined on taking us deeper into Europe too.
I think ukip support is a lot 'harder' than people think, and I would be very surprised if they feel below 10% at the next election. They - like Obama did - fit the Zeitgeist. And like Obama (and the lib dems), their supporters will be disappointed to discover that they are simply another bunch of politicians, dealing in the art of the possible.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
The Cameroons are pretty determined on taking us deeper into Europe too.
Congrats on the offer, Mr. Max. Sadly, I've no advice to offer but I'm sure one or two chaps here can offer some experienced views on the sort of work you'd be doing.
How much do you enjoy your current work, and how good is it in financial terms [vaguely, of course]?
Currently I earn mid five figures, the job on offer has a base wage of high five figures and a much more generous bonus scheme.
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
The hours in general in the City are very long indeed, but equities research shouldn't be too bad in that respect (but be warned that if there's a sudden development you'd be expected to drop everything).
I'd go for it. It will be fantastic experience, and probably very well paid.
Sorry - maybe I did not make myself very clear - I do not disagree with you that the Kipper vote goes up and down with elections and other events. What I meant was that there is a steady core below which UKIP will not fall and I agree with you that this core (or base) is gradually rising. In my experience it's quite unusual for voters to identify as anything other than Labour or Tory on the doorstep - even Lib Dems often tell canvassers that they are undecided (because identification with the Lib Dems as a party is usually quite weak). To find even a small number of voters who readily identify as UKIP is highly significant in my view - this suggests that UKIP does have a small but growing number of committed supporters who are very unlikely to change their allegiance this side of the general election.
Yes, that's right. We had 17% LibDems at the last election, but we actually find more people spontaneously saying they're UKIP. Spontaneous Tories are getting fairly rare too, actually, though we get some "nah, not Labour" responses which could mean anyone.
"The euro area may have to wait for a change in the European Union’s founding treaties to get a permanent public backstop for its planned centralized bank-resolution authority, EU draft documents show"
The article envisages another Treaty "within the next 10 years".
Could be perfect timing for Ed.
Well, that's just a Lithuanian draft, but 2022ish sounds about right, if they start thinking about it seriously now. I don't think that anyone serious in the EU expects a treaty revision ready for voting before 2020. Lithuania just envisages having a treaty to confirm the arrangements formally after they've been working for most of a decade.
Might give UKIP a further boost in 2020, come to that.
They need a new Treaty for proper banking and fiscal union, so the euro can function properly. Ideally they'd like a decade to twiddle around before making this change, not least so the present hostility to the EU, right across Europe, can subside, and they will have a chance of getting it past voters.
However this depends on eurogeddon going away, or remaining chronic rather than acute - i.e. painful but not so painful it demands instant and significant political surgery.
Plenty of experts believe the eurocrisis is only in temporary abeyance, and will return in even nastier, deflationary form quite soon:
Plenty of experts didn't see the subprime crisis, or the eurozone sovereign debt crisis. Experts are always great at predicting the last crisis. I would bet that the next crisis will be something totally unexpected- inflation in the US, SOE problems in China, or the default of the Japanese government.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ??
It will of course be reassessed when people discover that a Miliband government is very far from being a benign extension of the coalition, but of course by then it will too late to undo the damage.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
The Cameroons are pretty determined on taking us deeper into Europe too.
Evidence ?
"The Coalition is planning to opt back in to 35 EU justice schemes, including the controversial European Arrest Warrant,"
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
I know nothing about the city Max, but looking between the lines it looks like a good offer, especially as it's an old friend of your dad's. Sometimes in life one suddenly comes to a clear fork in the road, this seems such a time. Take the offer Max, advance in work and life and good luck to you.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
The Cameroons are pretty determined on taking us deeper into Europe too.
Evidence ?
"The Coalition is planning to opt back in to 35 EU justice schemes, including the controversial European Arrest Warrant,"
I think ukip support is a lot 'harder' than people think, and I would be very surprised if they feel below 10% at the next election. They - like Obama did - fit the Zeitgeist. And like Obama (and the lib dems), their supporters will be disappointed to discover that they are simply another bunch of politicians, dealing in the art of the possible.
The Lib Dems got away with promising anything to anyone (depending on the seat) for quite a while before they got caught out.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Best thing if you "can't be moved" is to get a decent laxtative.
I love you way you spin that - we leave a number of EU measures and rejoin some: story is that we rejoin 35,
Like anything else in this world, the EU-wide arrest warrant is a question of swings-and-roundabouts. Is it better to minimise the risk of losing (say) Madelain McCann's abductor due to the extridition process allowing the suspect to flee, or to protect the rights of British citizens accused of crimes in other EU countries?
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Will that be reassessed when they have 0 MPs and a Labour government taking us deeper into Europe in 2015 ?
The Cameroons are pretty determined on taking us deeper into Europe too.
Evidence ?
"The Coalition is planning to opt back in to 35 EU justice schemes, including the controversial European Arrest Warrant,"
I think ukip support is a lot 'harder' than people think, and I would be very surprised if they feel below 10% at the next election. They - like Obama did - fit the Zeitgeist. And like Obama (and the lib dems), their supporters will be disappointed to discover that they are simply another bunch of politicians, dealing in the art of the possible.
Except that UKIP probably wouldn't get any MPs, or only a couple, with 10% of the vote, and they will be nowhere near power, so their supporters can go on feeling righteously angry and worshipful of Farage's integrity - unsullied by the compromises of governance.
The Lib Dems felt this way, quite happily, for five decades, even as they got 20%+ of the vote and nearly 60 MPs. It was only actual power - coalition - which shafted them.
The test might come if Cameron offers an electoral pact, in desperation, in late 2014 early 2015. But that is highly unlikely.
I think if you promised the Kippers a guaranteed 50 years of righteous anger they would elect you leader.
I think ukip support is a lot 'harder' than people think, and I would be very surprised if they feel below 10% at the next election. They - like Obama did - fit the Zeitgeist. And like Obama (and the lib dems), their supporters will be disappointed to discover that they are simply another bunch of politicians, dealing in the art of the possible.
The Lib Dems got away with promising anything to anyone (depending on the seat) for quite a while before they got caught out.
Yes - they made the mistake of ending up in government, where they could no-longer be all things, to all people :-)
Well, I've called him back and arranged a meeting so he can give me more details. I have a three month notice period at my current job as well, if it goes well I may hand in my resignation next week.
If I move it will be my second ever real job. I've never worked outside of Sony, but I do remember a discussion with a board level manager who said to get further in the company I would have to leave and come back with other experiences and that software development would see me stick to that for my whole future. Maybe it's time to do as he said...
Thanks for the responses guys. I think I needed a bit of a push.
@Southam - Sure, but the accession treaties were new. The UK could have said 'No thanks' or 'No thanks unless...' at that point. The UK could also have refused to ratify Lisbon until the creeping extension of the original 'Free movement of workers' had been corrected (See for example the 2004 Directive 2004/38/EC, and ECJ judgements such as Martinez Sala and Levin).
The time to get this right was, obviously, before ratifying Lisbon, and before agreeing to the accession treaties.
The time to get it right was when the principle of free movement of goods and people was being negotiated. If the Conservative government believed there were caveats to what it had agreed, it should have said so and should have made sure they were clearly identified in the implementing legislation. Labour got it wrong too, of course; but it was the Tories that signed us up not just to the concept of "free movement of workers", but specifically to the concept of EU citizenship.
Ah, but almost any economic crisis, anywhere in the world, will now test the eurozone to breaking point - because it is the weakest economic link in the global chain: ageing workforces, bad demographics, ridiculous welfare burdens, stupid bureaucracy, and a currency designed by a committee of idiots on drugs.
Note how the Great Stagnation began in America with subpprime mortgages, but it is Europe which has suffered more than any other part of the planet.
So the catalyst for eurocrisis 2.0 might indeed be external - but that doesn't matter.
I disagree.
The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically rolled back government spending. In Spain, for example, government spending has fallen by 5% of GDP. The Eurozone (except France) has opened up Labour markets. The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically improved its balance of payments. The PIIGS - in aggregate - now run current account and trade surpluses. (Ireland gets an A here, Spain a B+, Italy a B, while Portugal and Greece are still a little behind). In aggregate, the Eurozone runs a trade surplus, a smaller budget deficit than the UK, the US or Japan, and less government or consumer debt.
Yes, some of the banks are still over-levered (but even here, this is at least partially the result of accounting differences between the US and Europe), and yes unemployment in Spain and Greece is appalling.
But, on almost every economic metric, the Eurozone is a significantly stronger position than in 2008.
Well, I've called him back and arranged a meeting so he can give me more details. I have a three month notice period at my current job as well, if it goes well I may hand in my resignation next week.
If I move it will be my second ever real job. I've never worked outside of Sony, but I do remember a discussion with a board level manager who said to get further in the company I would have to leave and come back with other experiences and that software development would see me stick to that for my whole future. Maybe it's time to do as he said...
Thanks for the responses guys. I think I needed a bit of a push.
Good luck with this Max - get as many details as you can then see how you feel is my advice. Your instincts are usually right.
I think ukip support is a lot 'harder' than people think, and I would be very surprised if they feel below 10% at the next election. They - like Obama did - fit the Zeitgeist. And like Obama (and the lib dems), their supporters will be disappointed to discover that they are simply another bunch of politicians, dealing in the art of the possible.
Except that UKIP probably wouldn't get any MPs, or only a couple, with 10% of the vote, and they will be nowhere near power, so their supporters can go on feeling righteously angry and worshipful of Farage's integrity - unsullied by the compromises of governance.
The Lib Dems felt this way, quite happily, for five decades, even as they got 20%+ of the vote and nearly 60 MPs. It was only actual power - coalition - which shafted them.
The test might come if Cameron offers an electoral pact, in desperation, in late 2014 early 2015. But that is highly unlikely.
I think if you promised the Kippers a guaranteed 50 years of righteous anger they would elect you leader.
Both TGOHF and SeanT are wrong for different reasons. First, UKIP will gain a number of seats - how many is still a guess. Secondly, UKIP, if it does very well, will be in the market for coalition with the tories, but not with Cameron or Gids. So it would depend on the Tories if they wanted to stay in power. Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.
The time to get it right was when the principle of free movement of goods and people was being negotiated. If the Conservative government believed there were caveats to what it had agreed, it should have said so and should have made sure they were clearly identified in the implementing legislation. Labour got it wrong too, of course; but it was the Tories that signed us up not just to the concept of "free movement of workers", but specifically to the concept of EU citizenship.
You might be right, but the Maastricht Treaty and earlier treaties were about a much smaller set of countries, and about the 'free movement of workers'. Of course in retrospect maybe we should have been much more cautious about the ratchet tendency of the EU bureaucrats, but the fact still remains that all the problems we are now seeing arise directly from treaties signed under Blair and Brown.
It is ludicrous to blame governments who signed quite different treaties, with quite different provisions and with a completely different set of countries.
Looking at earlier posts I can confirm that the, "we will not be moved theme" is very strong in UKIP today; and getting stronger. Getting an average vote of 28.44% in last weeks 4 by-elections, continuing a recent trend, only makes UKIP support solidify, even more.
Best thing if you "can't be moved" is to get a decent laxtative.
I thought you were off, doing something or other, Mike.
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
Iirc there's a Freudian concept call the Vanity of Small Differences about why we tend to hate those who are only slightly different to ourselves than those completely different.
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
Iirc there's a Freudian concept call the Vanity of Small Differences about why we tend to hate those who are only slightly different to ourselves than those completely different.
quite true. The old anecdote "the members opposite are your opponents. Your enemies sit behind you" comes to mind.
Ah, but almost any economic crisis, anywhere in the world, will now test the eurozone to breaking point - because it is the weakest economic link in the global chain: ageing workforces, bad demographics, ridiculous welfare burdens, stupid bureaucracy, and a currency designed by a committee of idiots on drugs.
Note how the Great Stagnation began in America with subpprime mortgages, but it is Europe which has suffered more than any other part of the planet.
So the catalyst for eurocrisis 2.0 might indeed be external - but that doesn't matter.
I disagree.
The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically rolled back government spending. In Spain, for example, government spending has fallen by 5% of GDP. The Eurozone (except France) has opened up Labour markets. The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically improved its balance of payments. The PIIGS - in aggregate - now run current account and trade surpluses. (Ireland gets an A here, Spain a B+, Italy a B, while Portugal and Greece are still a little behind). In aggregate, the Eurozone runs a trade surplus, a smaller budget deficit than the UK, the US or Japan, and less government or consumer debt.
Yes, some of the banks are still over-levered (but even here, this is at least partially the result of accounting differences between the US and Europe), and yes unemployment in Spain and Greece is appalling.
But, on almost every economic metric, the Eurozone is a significantly stronger position than in 2008.
Yeah, europe is doing really well. They've managed to get a balance of payments surplus by destroying their economies so they can't afford to import anything. Result!
And let's look at those unemployment stats, which you virtually ignore:
Greek GDP growth 3Q13, annualised: -3%. Italy ditto: -0.4% Spain ditto: 0.4% Ireland ditto: 0% Portugal ditto: 0.8%
UK growth annualised: 3.2% US growth annualised: 3.6%
Italy has now experienced NINE CONTINUOUS QUARTERS OF RECESSION. And I haven't even mentioned France.
Let us step back and admire the New Reformed Europe.
Yes.
I don't ignore them, I say they are 'appalling'.
France, and to a lesser extent Italy, are unreformed economies where the politicians running them still believe in the magic money tree.
Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and many others have gone through the same structural reforms we did in the 1980s, the Scandinavians did in the 1990s, and Germany did in the 2000s.
Spain entered the crisis with one-in-five people working in construction, or construction related, activities.
Would you like to sketch a scenario - Euro or non-Euro - where that did not end badly?
If you want me to say that the Euro caused Spanish problems by throwing fuel on an already overheated property market, and leading to a dangerously unbalanced economy, then I'll say that, yes. You're right.
But Euro or no-Euro, Spain had to take painful structural reforms, and those will pay off in better economic growth over the next five years. And the same is true for Ireland, Portugal and others.
1. The BBC and political class' version of reality is a lie.
2. As England is a small and increasingly very crowded place the minority of people who know it's a lie is increasing all the time.
3. Fewer people are sedated by the cheap credit that was available during the biggest credit bubble in history (1998-2008).
edit: So all Ukip need to do is keep banging. It's the other parties who need a strategy.
nb On a slightly separate note the entire political class talks about the current economic situation here and around the world without ever mentioning that from 1998-2008 the banksters created the biggest credit bubble in history by lowering the price of credit. That should tell anyone neutral all they need to know.
Now obviously governments, companies and individuals didn't *have* to borrow more just because the cost of borrowing was massively lowered by the banksters but they did borrow more because the cost of borrowing was massively lowered by the banksters - and most importantly the banksters do this - create a massive boom-bust-depression cycle - every 75 years or so.
The time to get it right was when the principle of free movement of goods and people was being negotiated. If the Conservative government believed there were caveats to what it had agreed, it should have said so and should have made sure they were clearly identified in the implementing legislation. Labour got it wrong too, of course; but it was the Tories that signed us up not just to the concept of "free movement of workers", but specifically to the concept of EU citizenship.
You might be right, but the Maastricht Treaty and earlier treaties were about a much smaller set of countries, and about the 'free movement of workers'. Of course in retrospect maybe we should have been much more cautious about the ratchet tendency of the EU bureaucrats, but the fact still remains that all the problems we are now seeing arise directly from treaties signed under Blair and Brown.
It is ludicrous to blame governments who signed quite different treaties, with quite different provisions and with a completely different set of countries.
Maastricht was not about "the free movement of workers"; it created the concept of the citizen of the EU with enshrined rights that went way beyond freedom to work. And it was agreed after the Berlin Wall came down and at a time when eastern European countries were already beginning the process of applying for EU membership, a process that began formally in 1995. In short, the Conservative government signed up to creating the concept of an EU citizen, something that involved a major expansion of the rights of movement of all citizens of all EU member states, at a time when it was already clear that the EU was going to get a lot bigger, which was something that the Conservative government also fully supported.
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
A few words of caution, Max. Deliberately devil's advocate to prompt a response.
No bank executive however senior has the power (nor should have the power) to offer employment to an individual met for the first time outside the bank in a purely social environment. This doesn't mean that the offer isn't genuine just that it will be "subject to contract" and you will almost certainly need to go through a formal interview and assessment process both at line management and HR levels before any offer can be formalised. Treat the offer as an invitation "to come in for a chat" at this stage.
A good analyst will first do his own analysis of any job offer and employer first. By asking for advice here you are doing that, but try to meet analysts of your age and proposed seniority first. Generally an analyst will work shorter hours than, say, those in corporate finance or in trading divisions, but there is a clear relationship between reward and effort and you are likely to be sucked into a hot house competitive culture if you want to progress.
Large organisations rarely thank those that commit to their success. And banks are amongst the worst offenders. Take a job on your terms only: i.e. if it makes sense to you at the time. Don't expect more from your employer and certainly don't fall for any of the paternalistic career path and lifetime support crap pedalled by HR executives. The City pays high so it is free to hire and fire. And there are few fifty year old equity analysts taking the tube into the City in the morning.
Are you a big company man or do you prefer the relationships and freedoms involved in working in a smaller more personal unit? Most of the friends I knew who started in equity analysis at large city institutions are now working for themselves doing something completely different (setting up a vineyard for example). Some have migrated to hedge funds where they are partners in much smaller units. Only one or two have survived the original corporate jungle and have become senior executives (one to be fair is not yet 50).
My final word is to go into any offer with your eyes open and your expectations real. Don't focus only on the money, or if you do, fix only on the short term and keep your options open for the future.
All said, go for it if the job offer is genuine and you think that there is a fit between your needs and the opportunity. Working in the City is an unquestioned opportunity to accelerate your climb up the money tree.
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
Iirc there's a Freudian concept call the Vanity of Small Differences about why we tend to hate those who are only slightly different to ourselves than those completely different.
quite true. The old anecdote "the members opposite are your opponents. Your enemies sit behind you" comes to mind.
I remember YPM constructing that as the difference between the opposition and the enemy.
Googling it, Freud went on about the Narcissism of small differences, Vanity of Small differences is apparently a set of Grayson Perry tapestries.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
You are far behind the times Watcher, and thats disappointing: you haven't kept watch. Pity that.
There is another misapprehension you have in your comment that's worth addressing: that Eurozone periphery balance of payments improvements have come entirely due to import suppression. Actually, the data does not bear this out at all. See:
UK 29% Portugal 28% Spain 24% Italy 24% Greece 19%
In 2012 Portugal 39% +10% Spain 32% +8% UK 32% +3% Greece 27% + 8%
Essentially these countries have stopped living beyond their means, by diverting a portion of output towards exports. That process has been incredibly painful, as shown by the horrendous unemployment numbers, particularly in Spain and Greece. However, the structural adjustment is largely complete in these countries.
It is worth noting that every country that goes through extensive labour market liberalisation sees unemployment soar in the near term. If you allow employers to fire people, then they will fire the unproductive ones. This happened in the UK between 1979 and 1983 or so.
Could the process have been less painful if the countries had had their own currencies? Probably. But it is worth noting that the UK's early 1980s unemployment was exacerbated by the fact that our labour market liberalisation gave the forex market great comfort and between 1979 and 1983, despite our unemployment rate doubling (in a generally benign world economic environment) GBPUSD went fromm $1.60 to $2.40 - i.e. the pound actually strengthened.
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
A few words of caution, Max. Deliberately devil's advocate to prompt a response..... A good analyst will first do his own analysis of any job offer and employer first. By asking for advice here you are doing that, but try to meet analysts of your age and proposed seniority first. Generally an analyst will work shorter hours than, say, those in corporate finance or in trading divisions, but there is a clear relationship between reward and effort and you are likely to be sucked into a hot house competitive culture if you want to progress. etc .
Regarding the economic outlook, the state of the French economy, is what wories me about 2014+. How it can hope to grow under the domination of its public sector is bewildering. Ironically, it is possible that Hollande causes an economic crisis inside EC which holds down GDP growth in the UK and delivers the 2015 GE to Milliband. Slim chance but not impossible.
Regarding the economic outlook, the state of the French economy, is what wories me about 2014+. How it can hope to grow under the domination of its public sector is bewildering. Ironically, it is possible that Hollande causes an economic crisis inside EC which holds down GDP growth in the UK and delivers the 2015 GE to Milliband. Slim chance but not impossible.
I agree. France is where the eurozone lives or dies.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group has announced that it no longer needs the Contingent Capital Facility of £8 bn.provided by the Treasury and will be ending the arrangement a year earlier than planned.
The Contingent Capital Facility was made available to RBS in the event that its core tier 1 capital ratio fell below an agreed level. A fee is charged was charged by the Treasury to the Bank for the provision of this facility.
George will now forgo the last £320 million tranche of fees due for the last year of the facility but will now be able to reduce net debt and borrowing by releasing the £8 bn tied up in the facility.
The debt benefit will not show in the PSND ex and PSNB ex figures as it arises out of an excluded "financial intervention". The aggregate PSND and PSNB figures will however reflect the change.
Another example of how government finances are improving 'behind the scenes' and how the real level of borrowing (gilt issuance) is falling much faster than the headline "ex" figures suggest.
Have a Christmas drink on RBS, George. It is time to celebrate.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
Naughty, naughty! You are the impatient one. GE 2015 will resolve all.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
On the other hand, if UKIP is No.1 or No.2 in a nation-wide elections in the UK [ the Euros ], could parties scoring below them be considered major ?
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
On the other hand, if UKIP is No.1 or No.2 in a nation-wide elections in the UK [ the Euros ], could parties scoring below them be considered major ?
I don't actually think Farage being in place as a candidate sooner is necessarily to his advantage. As soon as his seat is announced he'll have the kitchen sink thrown at him there. Much better to have grassroots efforts working in a dozen or so possible seats, building up support so he has a solid base when the seat is announced, possibly next Autumn.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
On the other hand, if UKIP is No.1 or No.2 in a nation-wide elections in the UK [ the Euros ], could parties scoring below them be considered major ?
Labour were still a major party, when UKIP finished second and ahead of Labour in the 2009 EUros.
The time to get it right was when the principle of free movement of goods and people was being negotiated. If the Conservative government believed there were caveats to what it had agreed, it should have said so and should have made sure they were clearly identified in the implementing legislation. Labour got it wrong too, of course; but it was the Tories that signed us up not just to the concept of "free movement of workers", but specifically to the concept of EU citizenship.
You might be right, but the Maastricht Treaty and earlier treaties were about a much smaller set of countries, and about the 'free movement of workers'. Of course in retrospect maybe we should have been much more cautious about the ratchet tendency of the EU bureaucrats, but the fact still remains that all the problems we are now seeing arise directly from treaties signed under Blair and Brown.
It is ludicrous to blame governments who signed quite different treaties, with quite different provisions and with a completely different set of countries.
The free movement of labour is enshrined in the 1957 treaty. Regarding East European accession, the biggest driving force was Margaret Thatcher herself to counteract the Franco-German axis or so she believed. It is , as always, very convenient for you to blame Labour for all ills that you see.
The free movement of labour is the greatest achievement of the European Union !
I don't actually think Farage being in place as a candidate sooner is necessarily to his advantage. As soon as his seat is announced he'll have the kitchen sink thrown at him there. Much better to have grassroots efforts working in a dozen or so possible seats, building up support so he has a solid base when the seat is announced, possibly next Autumn.
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
On the other hand, if UKIP is No.1 or No.2 in a nation-wide elections in the UK [ the Euros ], could parties scoring below them be considered major ?
Labour were still a major party, when UKIP finished second and ahead of Labour in the 2009 EUros.
Absolutely right. Therefore, UKIP has to be considered a major party if it scores above the Lib Dems in 2015. Are the FDP in Germany not a major party ? The Conservatives in Canada when they ended up with just 2 MPs ?
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
Simon
I fear you are being a little unfair to UKIP.
In an albeit narrow "Fawlty Towers" sense, the party can jusifiably be described as "Major".
Ah, but almost any economic crisis, anywhere in the world, will now test the eurozone to breaking point - because it is the weakest economic link in the global chain: ageing workforces, bad demographics, ridiculous welfare burdens, stupid bureaucracy, and a currency designed by a committee of idiots on drugs.
Note how the Great Stagnation began in America with subpprime mortgages, but it is Europe which has suffered more than any other part of the planet.
So the catalyst for eurocrisis 2.0 might indeed be external - but that doesn't matter.
I disagree.
The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically rolled back government spending. In Spain, for example, government spending has fallen by 5% of GDP. The Eurozone (except France) has opened up Labour markets. The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically improved its balance of payments. The PIIGS - in aggregate - now run current account and trade surpluses. (Ireland gets an A here, Spain a B+, Italy a B, while Portugal and Greece are still a little behind). In aggregate, the Eurozone runs a trade surplus, a smaller budget deficit than the UK, the US or Japan, and less government or consumer debt.
Yes, some of the banks are still over-levered (but even here, this is at least partially the result of accounting differences between the US and Europe), and yes unemployment in Spain and Greece is appalling.
But, on almost every economic metric, the Eurozone is a significantly stronger position than in 2008.
Yeah, europe is doing really well. They've managed to get a balance of payments surplus by destroying their economies so they can't afford to import anything. Result!
And let's look at those unemployment stats, which you virtually ignore:
Greek GDP growth 3Q13, annualised: -3%. Italy ditto: -0.4% Spain ditto: 0.4% Ireland ditto: 0% Portugal ditto: 0.8%
UK growth annualised: 3.2% US growth annualised: 3.6%
Italy has now experienced NINE CONTINUOUS QUARTERS OF RECESSION. And I haven't even mentioned France.
Let us step back and admire the New Reformed Europe.
Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and many others have gone through the same structural reforms we did in the 1980s, the Scandinavians did in the 1990s, and Germany did in the 2000s.
better economic growth over the next five years. And the same is true for Ireland, Portugal and others.
You're demented if you think Ireland, Spain and Portugal are about to enter some high-growth nirvana. They are locked into a currency whose interest rates and forex rates are tailored to Germany, and which now threatens to imprison them in a deflationary spiral.
Of course they will get some growth as they emerge, slowly, painfully out of the worst recession in a century, but you always get rebound growth in that situation. However the growth they will get will be much less than it would have been, if they were outside the euro from the off.
The euro was a bad idea executed disastrously, and it is still destroying jobs, lives and companies in the European periphery. That's all we need to know. All else is sophistry.
So why are almost all political parties so desperate to stay in ?
'Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.'
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
UKIP is growing into a major political party. While we in UKIP admire and like Farage for his hard work and dedication as a leader, UKIP is no longer dependent on him for continued advancement. No more than the Tories are dependent on cammo, or labour on millipede. or for that matter the L'Dems on Cleggover.
Certainly influential wrt recent polling and elections etc, but can a political party without a single elected member of Parliament be described as 'major' ?
Simon
I fear you are being a little unfair to UKIP.
In an albeit narrow "Fawlty Towers" sense, the party can jusifiably be described as "Major".
Comments
Where does that leave our Nigel?
Might give UKIP a further boost in 2020, come to that.
I agree with that - by "months on end" I was really thinking back to early autumn. Labour drifted over the summer due to doing nothing, but since conference season it has been locked at 39ish.
Re: Ukip. I am one of those who dismiss them. But maybe you are right and their vote is harder than I think. Many seem to loathe the Tories more than Labour. Odd but there it is.
So what becomes of UKIP post-2015 if Labour win a majority ? I suppose the related question is what will happen to the Conservatives ?
Its merely window dressing to look good to waivering tory voters temped by UKIP and tory MPs who might vote for her in a leadership contest.
Might give UKIP a further boost in 2020, come to that.
What makes you think a Labour led government will keep to the 5 year statute, Nick?
Would they not find it more flexible to repeal it, and so add another measure of power over the opposition?
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/amsterdam_treaty/a12000_en.htm
I've had an offer from Barclays to work in equities research. Basically I was at my parents' house over the weekend and my dad had some of his old work friends over, one of whom is relatively high up the chain at BIB. I got chatting to him and he was, apparently, impressed by my ability to see the big picture where others are not able to do so. He called me today and offered me a position in BIB. It pays significantly more than I currently earn and he said the job security is good as the division is growing quite rapidly.
With my mega-mortgage in mind I'm very tempted, but I've never worked in the City before and while he says the hours are not so bad (40 hours per week, rarely work late) I have not heard anyone in the City every say they had good hours.
So yeah, what's the advice.
Congrats on the offer, Mr. Max. Sadly, I've no advice to offer but I'm sure one or two chaps here can offer some experienced views on the sort of work you'd be doing.
How much do you enjoy your current work, and how good is it in financial terms [vaguely, of course]?
Or is the smug moral high ground more important ?
The time to get this right was, obviously, before ratifying Lisbon, and before agreeing to the accession treaties.
I'd go for it. It will be fantastic experience, and probably very well paid.
I've got the the data but I'm off out
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10181501/MPs-vote-to-withdraw-from-130-EU-crime-and-justice-measures.html
PS. My son is named Max, I like the name.
Is that it ?
Like anything else in this world, the EU-wide arrest warrant is a question of swings-and-roundabouts. Is it better to minimise the risk of losing (say) Madelain McCann's abductor due to the extridition process allowing the suspect to flee, or to protect the rights of British citizens accused of crimes in other EU countries?
A free country unencumbered and unchained from bad treaties, will always do better than those ruled by self serving bureaucrats.
If I move it will be my second ever real job. I've never worked outside of Sony, but I do remember a discussion with a board level manager who said to get further in the company I would have to leave and come back with other experiences and that software development would see me stick to that for my whole future. Maybe it's time to do as he said...
Thanks for the responses guys. I think I needed a bit of a push.
The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically rolled back government spending. In Spain, for example, government spending has fallen by 5% of GDP.
The Eurozone (except France) has opened up Labour markets.
The Eurozone (except France) has dramatically improved its balance of payments. The PIIGS - in aggregate - now run current account and trade surpluses. (Ireland gets an A here, Spain a B+, Italy a B, while Portugal and Greece are still a little behind).
In aggregate, the Eurozone runs a trade surplus, a smaller budget deficit than the UK, the US or Japan, and less government or consumer debt.
Yes, some of the banks are still over-levered (but even here, this is at least partially the result of accounting differences between the US and Europe), and yes unemployment in Spain and Greece is appalling.
But, on almost every economic metric, the Eurozone is a significantly stronger position than in 2008.
A free country unencumbered and unchained from bad treaties, will always do better than those ruled by self serving bureaucrats.
Well that is a spectacularly stupid factoid!
Hint: Take a look at Germany, Austria or Finland over the same period.
A free country unencumbered and unchained from bad treaties, will always do better than those ruled by self serving bureaucrats.
I never had you down as a SNPer MikeK.
First, UKIP will gain a number of seats - how many is still a guess.
Secondly, UKIP, if it does very well, will be in the market for coalition with the tories, but not with Cameron or Gids. So it would depend on the Tories if they wanted to stay in power.
Thirdly, UKIP are in for the long haul; say another decade if need be.
It is ludicrous to blame governments who signed quite different treaties, with quite different provisions and with a completely different set of countries.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25408993
new forms of work for lawyers.
By then, it will all be too late if you help Labour over the line in 2015.
What are UKIP without Farage? He's a heavy smoker, and a drinker; I wouldn't rate his long term health outlook as being that great.
I don't ignore them, I say they are 'appalling'.
France, and to a lesser extent Italy, are unreformed economies where the politicians running them still believe in the magic money tree.
Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and many others have gone through the same structural reforms we did in the 1980s, the Scandinavians did in the 1990s, and Germany did in the 2000s.
Spain entered the crisis with one-in-five people working in construction, or construction related, activities.
Would you like to sketch a scenario - Euro or non-Euro - where that did not end badly?
If you want me to say that the Euro caused Spanish problems by throwing fuel on an already overheated property market, and leading to a dangerously unbalanced economy, then I'll say that, yes. You're right.
But Euro or no-Euro, Spain had to take painful structural reforms, and those will pay off in better economic growth over the next five years. And the same is true for Ireland, Portugal and others.
2. As England is a small and increasingly very crowded place the minority of people who know it's a lie is increasing all the time.
3. Fewer people are sedated by the cheap credit that was available during the biggest credit bubble in history (1998-2008).
edit: So all Ukip need to do is keep banging. It's the other parties who need a strategy.
nb On a slightly separate note the entire political class talks about the current economic situation here and around the world without ever mentioning that from 1998-2008 the banksters created the biggest credit bubble in history by lowering the price of credit. That should tell anyone neutral all they need to know.
Now obviously governments, companies and individuals didn't *have* to borrow more just because the cost of borrowing was massively lowered by the banksters but they did borrow more because the cost of borrowing was massively lowered by the banksters - and most importantly the banksters do this - create a massive boom-bust-depression cycle - every 75 years or so.
A conflict that guarantees massive casualties due to tiny differences over an issue no-one cares about.
No bank executive however senior has the power (nor should have the power) to offer employment to an individual met for the first time outside the bank in a purely social environment. This doesn't mean that the offer isn't genuine just that it will be "subject to contract" and you will almost certainly need to go through a formal interview and assessment process both at line management and HR levels before any offer can be formalised. Treat the offer as an invitation "to come in for a chat" at this stage.
A good analyst will first do his own analysis of any job offer and employer first. By asking for advice here you are doing that, but try to meet analysts of your age and proposed seniority first. Generally an analyst will work shorter hours than, say, those in corporate finance or in trading divisions, but there is a clear relationship between reward and effort and you are likely to be sucked into a hot house competitive culture if you want to progress.
Large organisations rarely thank those that commit to their success. And banks are amongst the worst offenders. Take a job on your terms only: i.e. if it makes sense to you at the time. Don't expect more from your employer and certainly don't fall for any of the paternalistic career path and lifetime support crap pedalled by HR executives. The City pays high so it is free to hire and fire. And there are few fifty year old equity analysts taking the tube into the City in the morning.
Are you a big company man or do you prefer the relationships and freedoms involved in working in a smaller more personal unit? Most of the friends I knew who started in equity analysis at large city institutions are now working for themselves doing something completely different (setting up a vineyard for example). Some have migrated to hedge funds where they are partners in much smaller units. Only one or two have survived the original corporate jungle and have become senior executives (one to be fair is not yet 50).
My final word is to go into any offer with your eyes open and your expectations real. Don't focus only on the money, or if you do, fix only on the short term and keep your options open for the future.
All said, go for it if the job offer is genuine and you think that there is a fit between your needs and the opportunity. Working in the City is an unquestioned opportunity to accelerate your climb up the money tree.
Googling it, Freud went on about the Narcissism of small differences, Vanity of Small differences is apparently a set of Grayson Perry tapestries.
Con (Anne-Marie Trevelyan) 2/5
LD (Julie Porksen) 7/4
Lab 40/1
UKIP 80/1
BetVictor - Most seats at the 2016 Scottish general election
SNP 4/6
Lab 5/4
Any other 150/1
Unfortunately I took so much money off Victor Chandler at the 2011 GE that they closed my account.
You are far behind the times Watcher, and thats disappointing: you haven't kept watch. Pity that.
There is another misapprehension you have in your comment that's worth addressing: that Eurozone periphery balance of payments improvements have come entirely due to import suppression. Actually, the data does not bear this out at all. See:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.EXP.GNFS.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2012+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
In 2009 exports a percentage of gdp
UK 29%
Portugal 28%
Spain 24%
Italy 24%
Greece 19%
In 2012
Portugal 39% +10%
Spain 32% +8%
UK 32% +3%
Greece 27% + 8%
Essentially these countries have stopped living beyond their means, by diverting a portion of output towards exports. That process has been incredibly painful, as shown by the horrendous unemployment numbers, particularly in Spain and Greece. However, the structural adjustment is largely complete in these countries.
It is worth noting that every country that goes through extensive labour market liberalisation sees unemployment soar in the near term. If you allow employers to fire people, then they will fire the unproductive ones. This happened in the UK between 1979 and 1983 or so.
Could the process have been less painful if the countries had had their own currencies? Probably. But it is worth noting that the UK's early 1980s unemployment was exacerbated by the fact that our labour market liberalisation gave the forex market great comfort and between 1979 and 1983, despite our unemployment rate doubling (in a generally benign world economic environment) GBPUSD went fromm $1.60 to $2.40 - i.e. the pound actually strengthened.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25410141
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group has announced that it no longer needs the Contingent Capital Facility of £8 bn.provided by the Treasury and will be ending the arrangement a year earlier than planned.
The Contingent Capital Facility was made available to RBS in the event that its core tier 1 capital ratio fell below an agreed level. A fee is charged was charged by the Treasury to the Bank for the provision of this facility.
George will now forgo the last £320 million tranche of fees due for the last year of the facility but will now be able to reduce net debt and borrowing by releasing the £8 bn tied up in the facility.
The debt benefit will not show in the PSND ex and PSNB ex figures as it arises out of an excluded "financial intervention". The aggregate PSND and PSNB figures will however reflect the change.
Another example of how government finances are improving 'behind the scenes' and how the real level of borrowing (gilt issuance) is falling much faster than the headline "ex" figures suggest.
Have a Christmas drink on RBS, George. It is time to celebrate.
http://survation.com/2013/12/alan-bown-polls-4-new-constituencies/
Yes, obviously.
Police say there is no evidence to support claims of involvement of the SAS in a plot to cause the death of the Princess of Wales.
http://news.sky.com/story/1183222/diana-death-no-evidence-sas-involved
The free movement of labour is the greatest achievement of the European Union !
Also, interesting to see Kevin Rudd on C4 news where he was asked about rumours he wanted to be secretary general
I fear you are being a little unfair to UKIP.
In an albeit narrow "Fawlty Towers" sense, the party can jusifiably be described as "Major".
Cameron`s greatest achievement is the split of the right-wing vote and the consolidation of the left-wing vote.A Margaret Thatcher in reverse.
In 1997 the Lib Dems were talking about Folkestone being a nailed on gain.
It was only thanks to the Leaders boost in 2005 that turned Folkestone into a safeish seat.
Is that Dave in drag?18th century painting of Catherine the Great bears an uncanny resemblance to the Prime Minister
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2524768/18th-century-painting-Catherine-Great-looks-like-David-Cameron-drag.html
;-)
Perhaps it`s loss would indicate the swing away from the Tories.
Arf - don't mention the war Basil : )