Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Unpicking the presidential election forecasts

1246710

Comments

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    Interesting thanks.
    One establishment was selling £1 burgers by simply taking the £10 off the total price rather than, as it should have been, 50% off up to £10.
    If they put that burger through the till at £11 then they're in trouble because the automated rebate will only be £5.50, other than the separate courses method the scheme was difficult to break due to its simplicity.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:
    If laboratory processing is the 'pinch point', the claimed capacity simply doesn't exist.
    There is 370k capacity for all tests, but only 250k for the antigen tests which are in demand right now. Of course why would a political journalist know or care about the difference?
    There clearly isn't a capacity of 250k, though.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    Scott_xP said:
    I am given to the view that Falconer is quite the expert on resignations.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:
    If laboratory processing is the 'pinch point', the claimed capacity simply doesn't exist.
    There is 370k capacity for all tests, but only 250k for the antigen tests which are in demand right now. Of course why would a political journalist know or care about the difference?
    There clearly isn't a capacity of 250k, though.
    True, but the overestimate is nowhere near as bad as is claimed in that tweet.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    They’re all too busy reading the Withdrawal Agreement and the Act to find out what’s in them.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    I wonder about the self employed grant.
    We took the first but not the second (are turning away work, never been busier).
    Not everyone will be scrupulous.
    Will there be a reckoning once year end rolls in?
    I'm self-employed and business has been slacker over the last few months, but not, I think, due particularly to Covid. Nevertheless, HMRC has noticed the drop in my VAT returns and has suggested that I avail myself of the self-employed grant. I haven't, because I'm honest, but I'm sure others may have given in to temptation, especially if they are in financial difficulties.
    Yep. An e-mail asking whether you would like a large sum of cash which isn't 'repayable is a tempter for sure.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited September 2020
    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    This is exactly what I'd be doing if I was, say, Gavin Williamson. I'd be resigning and then making a very high minded and dignified speech from the backbenches saying that with great sadness I had concluded that the small cabal of populist fanatics currently running the government, aided and abetted by their mascot "Boris" Johnson, were in the process of not only destroying British democracy itself but destroying something far more precious than that - the Conservative Party.

    Then wait.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article, Richard.
    The 538 odds on the more extreme outcomes do seem intuitively wrong. Is there something in their model which adds in too much randomness to allow for unpredictable events ?

    MASSIVE change to the 538 model today!

    Up to now it has said that Biden is slightly favoured to win the election.

    I posted before that I thought the "slightly" to be inconsistent with their own numbers - the 70% chance they give him - and a transparent piece of arse covering language.

    Well they have listened to me. It's still 70% but the "slightly" has gone. Biden is now "favoured to win the election".

    Which I agree with. He is.

    Next question. When will they insert a "clearly"?
    The 'slightly' was dropped a few days ago – it pops up when the chance falls below 70% – and the model was at 69% for a while.
  • alednamalednam Posts: 185
    It would be interesting to know how 538’s 2020 model differs from theirs of 2016. You might think they’ve learnt to be cautious, and one way to do so is not to discount the unlikely.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Perhaps one might take a moment to reflect that the abject veneration of lawyers is something of an esoteric obsession not shared by a hefty chunk of the populace. Otherwise known as the most important thing ever in the history of the universe for some on here.
  • The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    There are plenty left. They just aren't to be found in the Conservative Party any more,
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited September 2020
    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.
  • algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    AIUI working two jobs wouldnt be fraudulent but could be breach of contract depending on the employment contract? An interesting addition to the wfh debate, not heard it suggested before, but you are absolutely right that it will be very difficult for employers to monitor and stop this.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    This is exactly what I'd be doing if I was, say, Gavin Williamson. I'd be resigning and then making a very high minded and dignified speech from the backbenches saying that with great sadness I had concluded that the small cabal of populist fanatics currently running the government, aided and abetted by their mascot "Boris" Johnson, were in the process of not only destroying British democracy itself but destroying something far more precious than that - the Conservative Party.

    Then wait.
    "High minded" "dignified"...Williamson.
    I think I may have spotted why it hasn't happened.
  • The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    There are plenty left. They just aren't to be found in the Conservative Party any more,

    Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.

    On a related note, it seems that this week we will find out precisely why Suella Braverman was appointed Attorney General.

  • Perhaps one might take a moment to reflect that the abject veneration of lawyers is something of an esoteric obsession not shared by a hefty chunk of the populace. Otherwise known as the most important thing ever in the history of the universe for some on here.

    Absolutely. Most people only care about the law when they come up against it. That's what makes it so easy to break a democracy - especially when there is an unwritten constitution.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Yup, every single Trafalgar poll from 2016 MAssively understates Clinton in the "What will your neighbor vopte" questions and boosts Trump way above his actual tally"
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    Taking of typical US election tropes/measures. One of the old 'tests' used to be the beer test: which of the two candidates would you prefer to have a beer with?

    I dare say that was that was a wash between Hillary and Trump – Hillary is hardly a promising drinking buddy and Trump is a teetotaller.

    In this election, I think it's a clear nod towards Biden.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party
  • Regarding the rise in Covid-19 cases in the UK, there are similar problems in Ireland:

    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1303279758785085441
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    The USC Tracker poll has shifted again towards Biden today.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 19,618
    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    This is well worth a threader @MikeSmithson
  • dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    I wonder about the self employed grant.
    We took the first but not the second (are turning away work, never been busier).
    Not everyone will be scrupulous.
    Will there be a reckoning once year end rolls in?
    I'm self-employed and business has been slacker over the last few months, but not, I think, due particularly to Covid. Nevertheless, HMRC has noticed the drop in my VAT returns and has suggested that I avail myself of the self-employed grant. I haven't, because I'm honest, but I'm sure others may have given in to temptation, especially if they are in financial difficulties.
    That is certainly very honest.

    Just in case you werent aware of it, note that the threshold is whether business has been slacker and covid has been a factor. It does not have to be particularly down to covid, if covid has played any part, you would be eligible.

    This is explicit in the govt advice: "HMRC expects you to make an honest assessment about whether your business has been adversely affected. There is no minimum threshold over which your business’ income or costs need to have changed."

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/decide-if-your-business-has-been-adversely-affected-for-the-self-employment-income-support-scheme

    https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2020/06/i-am-self-employed-but-confused-about-whether-i-can-claim-my-bus/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    it's just occurred to me that whether Trump goes now or in 4 years, tradition demands that there will be a Trump presidential library. Given that they'll be destroying as much written evidence as possible, it's just going to consist of thousands of barely literate tweets, isn't it?

    Along with a copy of the Mueller Report, the Steele dossier, and several shelves of court records.
    And a load of caps.
    When the Trump team leaves the White House, they're going to steal all the caps lock keys from the keyboards.

    And no one will care.
    SAD!

    Something that exercises me is how this bizarre 4 years - Trump as POTUS - will be treated in those sober and quite dry documentaries you get on PBS that analyse each presidency for posterity. I love them and have watched them all. One each on JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama.

    So now there will have to be one on Donald Trump. And they need - in order to maintain the spirit of the series - to give it a sense of weight and history and some dignity. No small task.

    I'm intrigued and will be watching with great interest.

  • Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.
    ..

    Yes, I'm afraid that's true. What I don't know is whether it is a temporary aberration, or irreversible. The Labour Party seems to have come to its senses quite quickly, so maybe there is hope for the Conservatives. Not until after at least one or probably several humiliating electoral defeats, though.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    This is well worth a threader @MikeSmithson
    The critical thing is that they don't report what their raw polling numbers were, they only give their headline figure "After adjustment for the neighbour question".

    So we can't judge how much of an effect the neighbor question had on their final figiures.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
  • Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    it's just occurred to me that whether Trump goes now or in 4 years, tradition demands that there will be a Trump presidential library. Given that they'll be destroying as much written evidence as possible, it's just going to consist of thousands of barely literate tweets, isn't it?

    Along with a copy of the Mueller Report, the Steele dossier, and several shelves of court records.
    And a load of caps.

    When the Trump team leaves the White House, they're going to steal all the caps lock keys from the keyboards.

    And no one will care.
    So long as they don't see the Shift key it will be fine.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    I’m off back to hospital. Maybe i’ll get a private room if I ham up the covid symptoms?
  • Nigelb said:

    RobD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:
    If laboratory processing is the 'pinch point', the claimed capacity simply doesn't exist.
    There is 370k capacity for all tests, but only 250k for the antigen tests which are in demand right now. Of course why would a political journalist know or care about the difference?
    There clearly isn't a capacity of 250k, though.
    Given daily tests are frequently above 200k recently, and the tests have gone up this week, it seems quite plausible that it is.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
    I think I have every right to call the Tory Party the Republican Party mixed with UKIP.

    They certainly don't have a consistent ideology, beyond help the rich out
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
    I think I have every right to call the Tory Party the Republican Party mixed with UKIP.

    They certainly don't have a consistent ideology, beyond help the rich out
    Yes they do, you just don't understand it.

    Cutting taxes doesn't help the rich out. The rich are always fine whatever, it is those struggling to cope that are best served by being able to keep more of their own money and having more opportunities through a better economy.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article, Richard.
    The 538 odds on the more extreme outcomes do seem intuitively wrong. Is there something in their model which adds in too much randomness to allow for unpredictable events ?

    MASSIVE change to the 538 model today!

    Up to now it has said that Biden is slightly favoured to win the election.

    I posted before that I thought the "slightly" to be inconsistent with their own numbers - the 70% chance they give him - and a transparent piece of arse covering language.

    Well they have listened to me. It's still 70% but the "slightly" has gone. Biden is now "favoured to win the election".

    Which I agree with. He is.

    Next question. When will they insert a "clearly"?
    The 'slightly' was dropped a few days ago – it pops up when the chance falls below 70% – and the model was at 69% for a while.
    Right. Fair enough. And we get a "clearly" at 85%, I now gather.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited September 2020

    The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
    I think I have every right to call the Tory Party the Republican Party mixed with UKIP.

    They certainly don't have a consistent ideology, beyond help the rich out
    The Tories are no longer the party of the rich but of the skilled working class and lower middle class, in 2019 only 40% of voters earning over £70,000 a year voted Tory compared to 47% of voters earning £20,000-£39,999.
    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wl0r2q1sm4/Results_HowBritainVoted_2019_w.pdf

    In 2015 by contrast the Tories were still the party of the rich, with 51% of voters earning over £70,000 a year voting Tory compared to only 37% of voters earning £20,000 to £39,999.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted

    In that sense they mirror the Trump GOP, given Romney like Cameron did best with the richest voters while Boris like Trump does best with middle income earners
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    This is exactly what I'd be doing if I was, say, Gavin Williamson. I'd be resigning and then making a very high minded and dignified speech from the backbenches saying that with great sadness I had concluded that the small cabal of populist fanatics currently running the government, aided and abetted by their mascot "Boris" Johnson, were in the process of not only destroying British democracy itself but destroying something far more precious than that - the Conservative Party.

    Then wait.
    "High minded" "dignified"...Williamson.
    I think I may have spotted why it hasn't happened.
    :smile: - Ok, Grant Shapps then.
  • There is a reason super-rich luvvies gravitate towards the Labour Party. The super-rich are the only people who can afford Champagne socialism.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712


    Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.
    ..

    Yes, I'm afraid that's true. What I don't know is whether it is a temporary aberration, or irreversible. The Labour Party seems to have come to its senses quite quickly, so maybe there is hope for the Conservatives. Not until after at least one or probably several humiliating electoral defeats, though.
    Labour only elected Starmer 15 years after the last Labour general election victory in 2005
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    I wonder about the self employed grant.
    We took the first but not the second (are turning away work, never been busier).
    Not everyone will be scrupulous.
    Will there be a reckoning once year end rolls in?
    I'm self-employed and business has been slacker over the last few months, but not, I think, due particularly to Covid. Nevertheless, HMRC has noticed the drop in my VAT returns and has suggested that I avail myself of the self-employed grant. I haven't, because I'm honest, but I'm sure others may have given in to temptation, especially if they are in financial difficulties.
    Hats off. Truly.
  • The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
    I think I have every right to call the Tory Party the Republican Party mixed with UKIP.

    They certainly don't have a consistent ideology, beyond help the rich out
    Yes they do, you just don't understand it.

    Cutting taxes doesn't help the rich out. The rich are always fine whatever, it is those struggling to cope that are best served by being able to keep more of their own money and having more opportunities through a better economy.
    Tory PR response as expected.

    The Tory Party exists for the benefit of the rich, end of story
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    Yes but if they are asking the same voting intention question as 2016 then their Michigan poll remains spot on, their question on who their neighbours are voting for is again listed separately in the sample
  • We can argue Labour has moved away from representing the poor as well (good grounds to agree) but it is wrong to say the Tories are the party of anyone but the rich
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    MaxPB said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    Interesting thanks.
    One establishment was selling £1 burgers by simply taking the £10 off the total price rather than, as it should have been, 50% off up to £10.
    If they put that burger through the till at £11 then they're in trouble because the automated rebate will only be £5.50, other than the separate courses method the scheme was difficult to break due to its simplicity.
    Indeed. But not my daughter’s problem.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    There is a reason super-rich luvvies gravitate towards the Labour Party. The super-rich are the only people who can afford Champagne socialism.

    The only full mArxist-Lennist (self described) that I have met, was rich, from old money and had a title.

    And paid for her lifestyle.... by renting property.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    I will throw in another interpretation - as is my want - which is far less positive for the Democrats.

    One factor that would explain this is if there are a lot of potential pro-Trump voters out there who didn't vote in 2016. People may have recognised their neighbours might have been more pro-Trump but they wouldn't have known whether they intended to vote.

    The difference in the two would be explained by Clinton's backers being more motivated to turn out and vote hence why the gap narrowed substantially when it came to the final result.

    That poll finding could suggest that Trump has a lot of potential backers out there and, if he can get them to vote, he has a large reserve pool of potential voters.

    I am not saying this is the correct interpretation but it is a possibility.
    ,

  • We can argue Labour has moved away from representing the poor as well (good grounds to agree) but it is wrong to say the Tories are the party of anyone but the rich

    Are you 13?

    The Tories exist for people who work for their own money.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    We can argue Labour has moved away from representing the poor as well (good grounds to agree) but it is wrong to say the Tories are the party of anyone but the rich

    And that's why you get gobsmacked when they win 43.6% of the vote - who knew there were so many rich people in this country!
  • kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    I wonder about the self employed grant.
    We took the first but not the second (are turning away work, never been busier).
    Not everyone will be scrupulous.
    Will there be a reckoning once year end rolls in?
    I'm self-employed and business has been slacker over the last few months, but not, I think, due particularly to Covid. Nevertheless, HMRC has noticed the drop in my VAT returns and has suggested that I avail myself of the self-employed grant. I haven't, because I'm honest, but I'm sure others may have given in to temptation, especially if they are in financial difficulties.
    Hats off. Truly.
    Not at all. The nature of my work is such that it is only affected by Covid insofar as the global economy is affected by Covid. I would have considerable difficulty demonstrating any direct link to Covid, and I prefer not to lose sleep worrying that I might have to do so!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    edited September 2020

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    It is, yes, though it will also be a test for Labour too (hopefully).

    If they take over will they be able to exercise the self-restraint to do what is right, and repair the damage, or will they do what is expedient in the short-term and simply replace one set of toadying partisan lickspittles with another?

  • Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.
    ..

    Yes, I'm afraid that's true. What I don't know is whether it is a temporary aberration, or irreversible. The Labour Party seems to have come to its senses quite quickly, so maybe there is hope for the Conservatives. Not until after at least one or probably several humiliating electoral defeats, though.
    The difference is that Labour went through its mad phase in opposition, as did the Conservatives in the early 2000s. Whilst its still not ideal, it's OK for an opposition party to go and lie down in a darkened room for a bit and return when they've come to their senses.

    What's unusual and alarming is that the Johnson government has been mad all along, and it's in government. So the urgency for it to go is greater. But it won't go, because it has a majority of 80.

    Thought experiment: suppose 40-50 Conservative MPs decided that enough was enough, that the need for Johnson to go was so urgent that a GNU under AN Other (probably Starmer) was the way forward. Because that's the only way of forcing BoJo out. But if Johnson were forced out now, a huge Stab In The Back myth would develop, and sanity would be pushed further into the future.

    It's a bit like the Trump paradox that @rcs1000 has alluded to; it would be better for Trump to have to stay on for another four years, to make the responsibility for the mess he has created clearer.

    In the UK context, Johnson and Johnsonism need to be seen to fail, or they will return. But it would be better for the UK not to experience that failure. And there's no obvious way to square that circle.
  • Regarding the rise in Covid-19 cases in the UK, there are similar problems in Ireland:

    https://twitter.com/MichealLehane/status/1303279758785085441

    Regarding Ireland:

    https://twitter.com/sineadm1990/status/1303091310023315459
  • Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    Sajid Javid and Jeremy Hunt are already in that congested space.
  • We can argue Labour has moved away from representing the poor as well (good grounds to agree) but it is wrong to say the Tories are the party of anyone but the rich

    Are you 13?

    The Tories exist for people who work for their own money.
    That is no less a naive view than CHB's.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    Yes but if they are asking the same voting intention question as 2016 then their Michigan poll remains spot on, their question on who their neighbours are voting for is again listed separately in the sample
    But without knowing their unadjusted figure we can't tell how much they use their Neighbor question to adjust the result.

    But the more important point is that other pollsters are also asking variations on the Neighbor question and people are using it as evidence for Shy Trumpers. But On the evidence of Trafalgar the Neighbor question led ot a large overstating of Trump and understating of Clinton.

    Trafalgar Shy Trump question
    Michigan: 5 points overstatement
    Colorado: 3 point overstatement
    Georgia: 4 point Overstatement
    North Carolina: 4 point Overstatement
    Ohio: 3 point Overstatement

    CAn't get the Pennsylvania or Nevada details.

    And Clinton was understated by more than Trump was overstated each time.

  • Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.
    ..

    Yes, I'm afraid that's true. What I don't know is whether it is a temporary aberration, or irreversible. The Labour Party seems to have come to its senses quite quickly, so maybe there is hope for the Conservatives. Not until after at least one or probably several humiliating electoral defeats, though.
    The difference is that Labour went through its mad phase in opposition, as did the Conservatives in the early 2000s. Whilst its still not ideal, it's OK for an opposition party to go and lie down in a darkened room for a bit and return when they've come to their senses.

    What's unusual and alarming is that the Johnson government has been mad all along, and it's in government. So the urgency for it to go is greater. But it won't go, because it has a majority of 80.

    Thought experiment: suppose 40-50 Conservative MPs decided that enough was enough, that the need for Johnson to go was so urgent that a GNU under AN Other (probably Starmer) was the way forward. Because that's the only way of forcing BoJo out. But if Johnson were forced out now, a huge Stab In The Back myth would develop, and sanity would be pushed further into the future.

    It's a bit like the Trump paradox that @rcs1000 has alluded to; it would be better for Trump to have to stay on for another four years, to make the responsibility for the mess he has created clearer.

    In the UK context, Johnson and Johnsonism need to be seen to fail, or they will return. But it would be better for the UK not to experience that failure. And there's no obvious way to square that circle.
    Alas, yes, you are right.
  • algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    AIUI working two jobs wouldnt be fraudulent but could be breach of contract depending on the employment contract? An interesting addition to the wfh debate, not heard it suggested before, but you are absolutely right that it will be very difficult for employers to monitor and stop this.
    Won't it be obvious with PAYE and the tax code HMRC provide?
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    I’m off back to hospital. Maybe i’ll get a private room if I ham up the covid symptoms?

    Good luck - hope all is well

  • Yep - I have noticed that. To be fair, though, the party you were a member of no longer exists. While everyone has been talking about whether Labour can survive, the Conservative and Unionist Party has been taken over entirely by UKIP.
    ..

    Yes, I'm afraid that's true. What I don't know is whether it is a temporary aberration, or irreversible. The Labour Party seems to have come to its senses quite quickly, so maybe there is hope for the Conservatives. Not until after at least one or probably several humiliating electoral defeats, though.
    The difference is that Labour went through its mad phase in opposition, as did the Conservatives in the early 2000s. Whilst its still not ideal, it's OK for an opposition party to go and lie down in a darkened room for a bit and return when they've come to their senses.

    What's unusual and alarming is that the Johnson government has been mad all along, and it's in government. So the urgency for it to go is greater. But it won't go, because it has a majority of 80.

    Thought experiment: suppose 40-50 Conservative MPs decided that enough was enough, that the need for Johnson to go was so urgent that a GNU under AN Other (probably Starmer) was the way forward. Because that's the only way of forcing BoJo out. But if Johnson were forced out now, a huge Stab In The Back myth would develop, and sanity would be pushed further into the future.

    It's a bit like the Trump paradox that @rcs1000 has alluded to; it would be better for Trump to have to stay on for another four years, to make the responsibility for the mess he has created clearer.

    In the UK context, Johnson and Johnsonism need to be seen to fail, or they will return. But it would be better for the UK not to experience that failure. And there's no obvious way to square that circle.
    The Tories haven't gone mad; though the pro-Europeans who are abjectly horrified at the concept of the UK as an independent sovereign free country certainly have.

    Even David Cameron, who campaigned for Remain, still acknowledged that the UK would be a successful country outside the EU and outside the Single Market. Some people seem to have completely lost their marbles about the prospect of it though.
  • The USC Tracker poll has shifted again towards Biden today.

    Consistent with the theory that nobody ever changes their mind, it's exactly repeating the things it did 2 weeks ago, because they rotate the panel on a 2-week schedule with only half of it getting counted at any one time.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    I almost posted something along these lines satirically, but luckily supporters of this government are self-satirising. PB Tories, please never change.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Scott_xP said:
    Now you've gone and done it - you've retweeted something that's actually funny. It had to happen one day, I suppose!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    @Stuartinromford - I think Labour went mad in government.
  • Scott_xP said:
    All Is Lost starring Robert Redford.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,853
    edited September 2020
    "Amusement" from France:

    Despite riding through a corridor of shouting people, some not even wearing masks, none of the Tour de France cyclists tested positive for Covid yesterday. This thing really doesn't like the outdoors, does it?

    However, race director Christian Prudhomme did test positive.

    He was in a car with the French PM a couple of days ago...


  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    Why do you find it so difficult to understand the concept that a legal officer would have difficulty with the Government ignoring the law? Some on the Leave side would do well to remember the mess the Government got itself into last time it tried to interpret the law against its own legal advice.
  • algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    AIUI working two jobs wouldnt be fraudulent but could be breach of contract depending on the employment contract? An interesting addition to the wfh debate, not heard it suggested before, but you are absolutely right that it will be very difficult for employers to monitor and stop this.
    Won't it be obvious with PAYE and the tax code HMRC provide?
    Yes, good point.

    Not sure on the details, looks like it gets messy and employees choose how their tax allowance is split across the two jobs, so they may be able to hide it to one of the employers with a normal tax code perhaps? (The other then gets charged at the marginal rate and employer would be able to notice - dont know if hr/payroll would generally pick that up and communicate to their line managers in big companies though).

    https://taxaid.org.uk/guides/information/issues-for-employees/employee/paye-with-two-jobspensions
  • "Amusement" from France:

    Despite riding through a corridor of shouting people, some not even wearing masks, none of the Tour de France cyclists tested positive for Covid yesterday. This thing really doesn't like the outdoors, does it?

    However, race director Christian Prudhomme did test positive.

    He was in a car with the French PM a couple of days ago...

    Fingers crossed for a dry, warm winter.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    Why do you find it so difficult to understand the concept that a legal officer would have difficulty with the Government ignoring the law? Some on the Leave side would do well to remember the mess the Government got itself into last time it tried to interpret the law against its own legal advice.
    If the Government is ignoring the law that is bad, though the Government can change the law. That is a big if.

    If the Government isn't but it goes deeply against the person's politics then it is not bad if go if they can't handle it.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    Cyclefree said:

    Perhaps one might take a moment to reflect that the abject veneration of lawyers is something of an esoteric obsession not shared by a hefty chunk of the populace. Otherwise known as the most important thing ever in the history of the universe for some on here.

    Perhaps you might take a moment to reflect on the difference between living in a country where the rule of law is respected and followed and one where it isn’t. Russia and China are examples of the latter. People are desperate to move there, I understand.
    Please - Boris could win landslide after landslide for the next twenty years, and Britain would still be a nation dominated by pettifogging, often self-defeating legalistic dogma at every turn. You might as well try to eradicate queueing!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited September 2020
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Alistair said:

    Hah. I am a research Genius. BETTING INFORMATION POST

    I finally got access to Traflagars mythical polling on Michigan and the result of their "genius" shy Trump question.

    Actual Result Clinton/Trump: 47.0/47.3
    Trafalgar Poll Clinton/Trump: 46.8/48.5

    That is a pretty excellent result

    However, they asked "Which candidate do you think most of your neighbors are voting for?" which is the shy Trump question that people are putting a lot of stock in

    Clinton/Trump: 39.8/52.1

    It is the same with their Colorado Poll. The Neighbor question over-estimates Trump bigley. I will hopefully be able to find their other polls where I am sure this will be repeated.

    So, my take on this is that there is no shy Trump effect. This actually shows a shy Clinton voter effect.

    EDIT: Also, just like their Colorado poll they had 18-25s breaking heavily for Trump. 56/37 in Trump's favour.

    Yes but if they are asking the same voting intention question as 2016 then their Michigan poll remains spot on, their question on who their neighbours are voting for is again listed separately in the sample
    But without knowing their unadjusted figure we can't tell how much they use their Neighbor question to adjust the result.

    But the more important point is that other pollsters are also asking variations on the Neighbor question and people are using it as evidence for Shy Trumpers. But On the evidence of Trafalgar the Neighbor question led ot a large overstating of Trump and understating of Clinton.

    Trafalgar Shy Trump question
    Michigan: 5 points overstatement
    Colorado: 3 point overstatement
    Georgia: 4 point Overstatement
    North Carolina: 4 point Overstatement
    Ohio: 3 point Overstatement

    CAn't get the Pennsylvania or Nevada details.

    And Clinton was understated by more than Trump was overstated each time.
    What we do know is their sample and question in 2016 was spot on in getting the actual result in Michigan.

    They did not use the how do you think your neighbours will vote to determine their voting intention figures, they were listed separately but if they used them to extract their spot on Michigan sample for voting intention of 2016 then Trafalgar remain the best pollster for Michigan in 2020 too and their latest poll putting Trump ahead in Michigan against Biden would be accurate.

    It should also be noted that in 2016 Trafalgar had Trump ahead in Pennsylvania too, their latest poll has Biden ahead of Trump in Pennsylvania so you cannot say they are just rehasing their 2016 results.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343

    algarkirk said:

    Cyclefree said:

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    Wow - surely not - if this is true the government should be crucified:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54066815

    5-10% dodgy was predictable no?
    Not predictable -- that is just the prediction. The actual figure could be anything but the headline writer got a bit excited.
    Ok. Guess so. But what I mean is, it was imo to be expected that a non trivial proportion of the total furlough costs - 5% say - would be accounted for by successful fraudulent or borderline fraudulent claims. A figure like that does not, would not, unduly surprise me.
    Indeed. All you had to do to claim was give a list of employees and how much cash you wanted. Inevitably would attract outright fraudsters (there are many in the ltd company space) as well as opportunistic unscrupulous fraudsters in significant numbers. Most common frauds will be claiming and having employees still working or claiming and not paying employee in at least 80%.

    There will also be a lot of errors as the detail behind the claims was not required and the calculations complex with guidance changing regularly.
    Some people are like that. Love to beat the system and get one over on the taxman. Even the Rishi Dishy, the £10 off meals, there were punters getting restaurants to split their bill of £60 into 3 x £20, thus getting £30 off instead of £10, then sharing the ill gotten gains. This is an integral part of our national character. It's why we end up with someone like Boris Johnson as PM.
    Blimey how do you know that is what people were doing?
    My daughter was asked to do this by some customers. She politely refused, pointing out that it was fraud.

    She knows of some other nearby establishments who were less scrupulous. Re the furlough payments, all of her claims were made through her accountants who manage her payroll and tax affairs so that everything was above board.
    It's like Murphy's Principle: If a fraud can happen it will. The other one worth watching out for is people WFH taking on two (or more) "Full Time" such jobs in the large Bullshit jobs sector, especially that growing part where lots of people make work for each other by sending emails and having Zoom meetings about the emails.

    AIUI working two jobs wouldnt be fraudulent but could be breach of contract depending on the employment contract? An interesting addition to the wfh debate, not heard it suggested before, but you are absolutely right that it will be very difficult for employers to monitor and stop this.
    Won't it be obvious with PAYE and the tax code HMRC provide?
    Only obvious in the same way that £3 billion of furlough fraud was obvious, stopped at source, immediately prosecuted and all the perpetrators already serving prison sentences.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959

    The Tory Party now is more like the Tea Party

    Tea = Taxed Enough Already.

    The Tories have always thought that.
    The Tory Party are like BNP-lite, mixed with UKIP and the Republican Party.
    Labour are BNP-lite, mixed with SJW and the Communist Party.

    Come on, be serious.
    I think I have every right to call the Tory Party the Republican Party mixed with UKIP.

    They certainly don't have a consistent ideology, beyond help the rich out
    Yes they do, you just don't understand it.

    Cutting taxes doesn't help the rich out. The rich are always fine whatever, it is those struggling to cope that are best served by being able to keep more of their own money and having more opportunities through a better economy.
    Tory PR response as expected.

    The Tory Party exists for the benefit of the rich, end of story
    At the last election, were there nearly 14m rich people voting Tory? Or just nearly 14m who WANTED to be rich?

    Or perhaps a bunch of voters who didn't want an anti-semite as PM?
  • For decades the Civil Service has been notorious for "gold plating" the EU rules. The rules need interpretation and that's the way its been done in this country.

    I don't see why, within reason, the UK shouldn't be "interpreting" the Withdrawal Agreement in the way it wants to do so.

    If the EU interprets the WA differently that's up to it. Much of the WA was deliberately vague so there is no single right interpretation for every issue.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    This is exactly what I'd be doing if I was, say, Gavin Williamson. I'd be resigning and then making a very high minded and dignified speech from the backbenches saying that with great sadness I had concluded that the small cabal of populist fanatics currently running the government, aided and abetted by their mascot "Boris" Johnson, were in the process of not only destroying British democracy itself but destroying something far more precious than that - the Conservative Party.

    Then wait.
    "High minded" "dignified"...Williamson.
    I think I may have spotted why it hasn't happened.
    :smile: - Ok, Grant Shapps then.
    Sunak. If he has the balls.

    Also avoids the fall out of having to cut spending/raise taxes etc.

    Go on, Rishi. Do it. It would be such fun. We haven’t had a proper Chancellor resignation - and accompanying speech - for ages. (Javid’s rather colourless one doesn’t count.)
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    Cyclefree said:

    Perhaps one might take a moment to reflect that the abject veneration of lawyers is something of an esoteric obsession not shared by a hefty chunk of the populace. Otherwise known as the most important thing ever in the history of the universe for some on here.

    Perhaps you might take a moment to reflect on the difference between living in a country where the rule of law is respected and followed and one where it isn’t. Russia and China are examples of the latter. People are desperate to move there, I understand.
    You're wasting your time. The tories don't give a fuck now. 80+ majority and all that.

    Democracy is social fascism so revolution is the only option. Eat the rich to help out.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    Why do you find it so difficult to understand the concept that a legal officer would have difficulty with the Government ignoring the law? Some on the Leave side would do well to remember the mess the Government got itself into last time it tried to interpret the law against its own legal advice.
    Because that's where populism gets you.

    If there is a conflict between what the law allows and what the will of the people (embodied in the current government) demands, the law must be wrong.

    An attractive doctrine if you are in power and can't imagine ever being out of power. Otherwise, madness.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    Why do you find it so difficult to understand the concept that a legal officer would have difficulty with the Government ignoring the law? Some on the Leave side would do well to remember the mess the Government got itself into last time it tried to interpret the law against its own legal advice.
    Because that's where populism gets you.

    If there is a conflict between what the law allows and what the will of the people (embodied in the current government) demands, the law must be wrong.

    An attractive doctrine if you are in power and can't imagine ever being out of power. Otherwise, madness.
    If the law is wrong then if only an institution existed with the power to change the law.
  • Cyclefree said:

    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    kinabalu said:

    Scott_xP said:

    The erosion of our democracy that Johnson/Cummings clearly plan is a test for the credentials of all genuine Conservatives, if there are any left.

    Any cabinet minister with designs on picking up the pieces after BoZo would do well to resign today
    This is exactly what I'd be doing if I was, say, Gavin Williamson. I'd be resigning and then making a very high minded and dignified speech from the backbenches saying that with great sadness I had concluded that the small cabal of populist fanatics currently running the government, aided and abetted by their mascot "Boris" Johnson, were in the process of not only destroying British democracy itself but destroying something far more precious than that - the Conservative Party.

    Then wait.
    "High minded" "dignified"...Williamson.
    I think I may have spotted why it hasn't happened.
    :smile: - Ok, Grant Shapps then.
    Sunak. If he has the balls.

    Also avoids the fall out of having to cut spending/raise taxes etc.

    Go on, Rishi. Do it. It would be such fun. We haven’t had a proper Chancellor resignation - and accompanying speech - for ages. (Javid’s rather colourless one doesn’t count.)
    He is the best thing about this government, better for the public to have him inside. And to be honest, its better for his career prospects too, sitting chancellors have a decent chance of taking over PM roles when the governing party has a good majority.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653

    We can argue Labour has moved away from representing the poor as well (good grounds to agree) but it is wrong to say the Tories are the party of anyone but the rich

    The Conservtive Party exists for those that are ideologically conservative. Personal wealth shouldn`t come in to it. The fact is that the Labour Party relies on votes from conservatives. Blair managed it, Starmer may also - not sure yet.
  • Scott_xP said:
    I wonder if that is that another deadweight Remoaner being cleared out?

    Appointed while that totally impartial individual Dominic Grieve was Attorney General I see.
    Why do you find it so difficult to understand the concept that a legal officer would have difficulty with the Government ignoring the law? Some on the Leave side would do well to remember the mess the Government got itself into last time it tried to interpret the law against its own legal advice.
    Because that's where populism gets you.

    If there is a conflict between what the law allows and what the will of the people (embodied in the current government) demands, the law must be wrong.

    An attractive doctrine if you are in power and can't imagine ever being out of power. Otherwise, madness.
    I don't believe it is inherent in populism. That is just another scornful word for those who dislike democracy. This is another matter entirely. It is a combination of arrogance and ineptitude. Both hallmarks of Johnson for much of his public life.
  • Scott_xP said:
    Bit of an overreaction from an extremely biased individual.

    The reality is that where this falls is that in a couple of months time this guy's name will be on the list of the rollcall of individuals who has been replaced by the new Government. Oooh shocking.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    Dura_Ace said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Perhaps one might take a moment to reflect that the abject veneration of lawyers is something of an esoteric obsession not shared by a hefty chunk of the populace. Otherwise known as the most important thing ever in the history of the universe for some on here.

    Perhaps you might take a moment to reflect on the difference between living in a country where the rule of law is respected and followed and one where it isn’t. Russia and China are examples of the latter. People are desperate to move there, I understand.
    You're wasting your time. The tories don't give a fuck now. 80+ majority and all that.

    Democracy is social fascism so revolution is the only option. Eat the rich to help out.
    At least you`re honest - unlike those who pretend they support democracy.
This discussion has been closed.