Howdy, Stranger!

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

In spite of CON leads of 7-9% in the polls punters still rate a hung parliament as the most likely G

SystemSystem Posts: 12,168
edited April 2021 in General
imageIn spite of CON leads of 7-9% in the polls punters still rate a hung parliament as the most likely GE outcome – politicalbetting.com

Above is the latest Betdata.io betting chart of Betfair’s next General Election overall majority market and as can be seen another Tory majority is rated as just a 37% chance behind a hung parliament.

Read the full story here

«13456710

Comments

  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,464
    First like Labour in Hartlepool......
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,464
    Great analysis..... I note that 8 out of the 10 top seats are Red Wall former Labour seats - fascinating election battle in 2023/4 awaits - IMO so much indirectly hinges on Scotland's events this Summer.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Second like Labour

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448
    Good morning one and all. A fine bright, if chilly morning. Just below 0 deg.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 288
    edited April 2021
    I think you need to take half the number of SF seats off 325 to get the effective boundary for a majority.
  • "Wimbledon, Carshalton, Cheltenham, Winchester and Cheadle – all of which look very vulnerable and where Davey’s party has been working very hard."

    a) It's Davey, the guy who was standing way behind Starmer when charisma was being doled out.

    b) You think the Tories haven't been working those seats hard?

    c) Rejoin is a very different thing to sell to Remain that gave them the bounce in those seats in 2019. Especially when Rejoin will come with a whole bunch of things we will have give up. Like membership of trade organisations that actually want us.

    d) Four more years of incumbency.

    The love of the EU and the antipathy towards Boris is far, far different on pb.com than that amongst the wider electorate.

    The way the LibDems regain these seats has little to do with the EU. These are classic centre-ground seats where the electorate vote for competent sane government. They get neither of those with today's Tories.

    As for Davey, there is much more about him than Starmer. His issue is finding a voice.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Congratulations.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710

    "Wimbledon, Carshalton, Cheltenham, Winchester and Cheadle – all of which look very vulnerable and where Davey’s party has been working very hard."

    a) It's Davey, the guy who was standing way behind Starmer when charisma was being doled out.

    b) You think the Tories haven't been working those seats hard?

    c) Rejoin is a very different thing to sell to Remain that gave them the bounce in those seats in 2019. Especially when Rejoin will come with a whole bunch of things we will have give up. Like membership of trade organisations that actually want us.

    d) Four more years of incumbency.

    The love of the EU and the antipathy towards Boris is far, far different on pb.com than that amongst the wider electorate.

    Rejoin is not LD policy. Closer relations are.

    Please stick to the facts.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
  • On topic, the elephant in the room for any suggestion of a Labour win of any kind of what happens in Scotland. Fascinating Martin Kettle piece in the Grauniad this morning - he says what Philip, myself and others have been saying for a while - that if Scotland votes for a referendum and Westminster says no, the union is no longer based on democratic consent.

    Red wall seats may be happy to gee along the Tories now thinking they have won. But as we go further along, as Brexit turns out to be a chimera and they see democratic consent thrown in the bin, that will change. Teesside is a great example of what happens when the voters think the powers that be are ignoring their will - they vote for anyone but.

    The Tories want to watch out...

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/14/boris-johnson-is-telling-scotland-that-the-union-is-no-longer-based-on-consent
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Paralegal? Are you not qualified now? Sometimes getting your foot in the door is the most important thing and one leads to another and employment is always good.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,000
    @Gabriel_Pogrund: Scoop by @BondHack/@cynthiao

    Sanjeev Gupta restructured his empire to obtain more money under a taxpayer-backed C… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382579221202141185
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    I would IP block this site,,,!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821

    Great analysis..... I note that 8 out of the 10 top seats are Red Wall former Labour seats - fascinating election battle in 2023/4 awaits - IMO so much indirectly hinges on Scotland's events this Summer.

    Some of these are quite different to others though. Stoke Central, Heywood and Middleton - definitely what we understand as red wall. Labour for decades until 2019. Bury North, Bury South, Bolton North East, High Peak though - all contain large middle class segments, and all has been Tory within the last three decades.
    Bury South is a bit of a special case in my view - Manchester halfway out, large middle class section, and the sort of seat which Labour has done reasonably well in in recent years. However, it's very Jewish. Interesting to see whether the swing against Labour in Jewish areas will unwind now Corbyn has gone.
  • Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Fab news!!!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    Scott_xP said:

    @Gabriel_Pogrund: Scoop by @BondHack/@cynthiao

    Sanjeev Gupta restructured his empire to obtain more money under a taxpayer-backed C… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382579221202141185

    Gathering in government grants, support, cheap finance that he could resell and reliefs seems to be the core of his business and its strategy not just in the UK but around the world. The steel stuff is just an excuse.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,000
    @LOS_Fisher: After Civil service chief yday ordered mandarins to declare controversial private sector roles, in wake of Greensil… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382581704880103424
  • DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,749

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    The number of new cases daily in India is scary. Doubled over 9 days to near 200 000. The upward trajectory is ferocious.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    Yes, betting on general elections this far out is a mug's game.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

  • eekeek Posts: 28,392
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    Yes, betting on general elections this far out is a mug's game.
    Yes, we see how fragile even "core vote" can be in 2017 and 2019 GE.

    I think it very unlikely that a boring reversion to the Mean will be the order of events.

    Remember how steady the polls were from May 2017 to May 2019 before massive swings took place? Predictions based on that weren't worth the price of a pint.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    If the rest of the world had come close to matching "Shagger's" (as you insist on calling him) performance in vaccine delivery they would be viable but sadly very few countries in the world have such outstanding leadership.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

    We might have more chances at medals though.

    Although athletes are probably least likely to be over 50 or under 50 with vulnerable health conditions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Many congratulations. Sounds like the perfect role (apart from the salary)!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    Very well said.

    The problem with the 0.7% (or any fixed %age) of aid is that it has absolutely nothing to do with the demands of the recipients, or making wise choices for the benefit of the recipients. It is purely doing something based upon our status not theirs. Purely about our politics, our economy, not theirs.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,599
    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    Sadly don’t see any way the Olympics goes ahead now.

    Japan isn’t vaccinating people, countries haven’t planned qualifying competitions, athletes in many cases haven’t competed for a year, media want to send tens of thousands of people there as they’ve paid top dollar for rights, nowhere else has the facilities for such a huge event, most facilities can’t be adequately socially distanced etc etc. Just way too many unknowns.

    Maybe we get an Olympic tournament for each sport, held later in the year in countires that have low rates of virus and high rates of vaccination - USA, UK, UAE, Israel and hopefully a few others.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

    We might have more chances at medals though.

    Although athletes are probably least likely to be over 50 or under 50 with vulnerable health conditions.
    I don’t know. Remember Maria Sharapova’s heart condition? :wink:
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Do you really think that losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well?

    I was thinking the opposite. Brexit saw a 'rally to the [EU] flag' effect across Europe in response. Plus since the Tory Party dominates in England whereas Labour would rely upon the SNP, then I was expecting that in any divorce proceedings Scotland would rally to the SNP to represent its interests but that England would rally to the Tories to represent England's interests.

    Like 2015 but on steroids.
  • DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    He's active on Twitter, so he's ok.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Do you really think that losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well?

    I was thinking the opposite. Brexit saw a 'rally to the [EU] flag' effect across Europe in response. Plus since the Tory Party dominates in England whereas Labour would rely upon the SNP, then I was expecting that in any divorce proceedings Scotland would rally to the SNP to represent its interests but that England would rally to the Tories to represent England's interests.

    Like 2015 but on steroids.
    Yes. I think Boris may well be forced to resign if the UK broke up on his watch and the Tory party would be in total turmoil. More like Black Wednesday on steroids than 2015.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,796

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Excellent news. I'm sure as you shine the salary will sort itself out and great you can exploit your engineering knowledge.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,030
    One of our neighbours has erected a large marquee in the paddock behind their house.

    I await developments with interest...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

    We might have more chances at medals though.

    Although athletes are probably least likely to be over 50 or under 50 with vulnerable health conditions.
    Though athletes losing 5% of their exercise ability due to covid may end their careers at a top level, even if able bodied for other bits of life.
  • Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Hurrah.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

    We might have more chances at medals though.

    Although athletes are probably least likely to be over 50 or under 50 with vulnerable health conditions.
    Though athletes losing 5% of their exercise ability due to covid may end their careers at a top level, even if able bodied for other bits of life.
    Indeed but my point was they won't have been eligible for a vaccine yet.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,725
    kjh said:

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Excellent news. I'm sure as you shine the salary will sort itself out and great you can exploit your engineering knowledge.
    Seconded and good luck.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Congrats!
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Do you really think that losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well?

    I was thinking the opposite. Brexit saw a 'rally to the [EU] flag' effect across Europe in response. Plus since the Tory Party dominates in England whereas Labour would rely upon the SNP, then I was expecting that in any divorce proceedings Scotland would rally to the SNP to represent its interests but that England would rally to the Tories to represent England's interests.

    Like 2015 but on steroids.
    Yes. I think Boris may well be forced to resign if the UK broke up on his watch and the Tory party would be in total turmoil. More like Black Wednesday on steroids than 2015.
    Hmmm, potentially but I don't see it.

    If it had happened in 2014 then yes Cameron would have had to go, but if it happens now it would be culminating an almost inevitability. Like removing a wisdom tooth.

    The key if it happens is to accept the result and not be dragged kicking and screaming every step of the way which is what made Black Wednesday so bad, the failed attempts on the day to ramp up interest rates really destroyed all remaining credibility.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,380

    "Wimbledon, Carshalton, Cheltenham, Winchester and Cheadle – all of which look very vulnerable and where Davey’s party has been working very hard."

    a) It's Davey, the guy who was standing way behind Starmer when charisma was being doled out.

    b) You think the Tories haven't been working those seats hard?

    c) Rejoin is a very different thing to sell to Remain that gave them the bounce in those seats in 2019. Especially when Rejoin will come with a whole bunch of things we will have give up. Like membership of trade organisations that actually want us.

    d) Four more years of incumbency.

    The love of the EU and the antipathy towards Boris is far, far different on pb.com than that amongst the wider electorate.

    The way the LibDems regain these seats has little to do with the EU. These are classic centre-ground seats where the electorate vote for competent sane government. They get neither of those with today's Tories.

    As for Davey, there is much more about him than Starmer. His issue is finding a voice.
    If yesterday's revelations have any resonance they might push reluctant one nation Conservatives into the LD camp.

    As for the dynamic Davey having more about him than Starmer, they both have the look of the "Quiet Man" about them, albeit Davey appears "quieter" than Starmer Maybe I am missing something and he is silent but deadly.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,920
    Foxy said:

    "Wimbledon, Carshalton, Cheltenham, Winchester and Cheadle – all of which look very vulnerable and where Davey’s party has been working very hard."

    a) It's Davey, the guy who was standing way behind Starmer when charisma was being doled out.

    b) You think the Tories haven't been working those seats hard?

    c) Rejoin is a very different thing to sell to Remain that gave them the bounce in those seats in 2019. Especially when Rejoin will come with a whole bunch of things we will have give up. Like membership of trade organisations that actually want us.

    d) Four more years of incumbency.

    The love of the EU and the antipathy towards Boris is far, far different on pb.com than that amongst the wider electorate.

    Rejoin is not LD policy. Closer relations are.

    Please stick to the facts.
    Sticking to the facts was not a feature of the Conservatives' last election campaign and I doubt next time will be different.
  • Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    Aye I've already seen this. Front page of the Mail as well.

    Arbitration continues in the background...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Thank you for your best wishes everyone!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,380

    One of our neighbours has erected a large marquee in the paddock behind their house.

    I await developments with interest...

    Party time!

    Don't forget to take the necessary precautions. Face, space and whatever the third one is.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Scott_xP said:

    @Gabriel_Pogrund: Scoop by @BondHack/@cynthiao

    Sanjeev Gupta restructured his empire to obtain more money under a taxpayer-backed C… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1382579221202141185

    The sort of person who breaks the rules in a small way rarely stops there. It’s why culture and principles are so important in the financial sector
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    From Dr Tang’s new study just published in the BMJ:

    The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after touching surfaces is now considered to be relatively minimal.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,000
    "However, it might help to focus the PM’s attention on the growing scandal to know that the Maude tentacles reach directly into No 10 itself."

    Greensill scandal sucking in Francis Maude and Boris’s deputy chief of staff - The Hound:

    https://reaction.life/greensill-scandal-sucking-in-francis-maude-and-boriss-deputy-chief-of-staff/
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    IanB2 said:

    From Dr Tang’s new study just published in the BMJ:

    The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after touching surfaces is now considered to be relatively minimal.

    For some reason I thought this had been common knowledge for some time.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,000
    Wonder if Boris may even reach behind the sofa and start talking about Brexit again - anything to change the news cycle https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1382526512331644929
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    Something something legal separation
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    Secondary education for girls is fantastic in driving down radical extremism among young men...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,351
    DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    They formally stated that a war criminal was a fit and proper person, so a spot of murder shouldn't be a problem.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    I was thinking primary school education for females, basic literacy. It has a big effect on family economics in African households. There is certainly a significant brain drain effect with tertiary education. Indeed a number of my colleagues are good evidence of that. I have a great new Sudanese Consultant starting soon.
  • DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    The sad thing is that the EPL are fine with body bags in embassies, the thing that stopped the takeover, which I flagged up before was, is that the EPL take their copyright and media contracts very seriously, it was the Saudi government's assault on BEIN Sports and support for the pirate boxes of BEQOut is what scuppered the deal.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,749
    edited April 2021
    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    Well it’s not everywhere is it. It’s not in the places with high rates of vaccination barely at all.
    So we can have an Olympics between us, USA, Israel and UAE? It might limit the fun.

    It would be trivial to vaccinate the athletes. Personally I’d hold the Japan Olympics in 2022 so tourists can attend too.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    IanB2 said:

    From Dr Tang’s new study just published in the BMJ:

    The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after touching surfaces is now considered to be relatively minimal.

    For some reason I thought this had been common knowledge for some time.
    It has been, that sentence was attributed to 3 sources from 2020 rather than fresh research.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,380

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    If Johnson doesn't yield, he could always demand his share of the curtains and wallpaper back.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    IanB2 said:

    From Dr Tang’s new study just published in the BMJ:

    The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after touching surfaces is now considered to be relatively minimal.

    For some reason I thought this had been common knowledge for some time.
    Indeed. All those wiping down of supermarket trolleys etc have achieved absolutely nothing so far as Covid is concerned. Of course the gains in respect of noravirus etc have been considerable and it is at record lows.

    Curiously, when I got my vaccine on Monday I had to wait 15 minutes and we were asked to wipe down our chairs with disinfectant when we had done our time.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392
    DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    It seems that everyone has a certain minimum standard.

    Albeit the issue might be the typical flaw of being found to have done it rather than doing it without being found out.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    If the rest of the world had come close to matching "Shagger's" (as you insist on calling him) performance in vaccine delivery they would be viable but sadly very few countries in the world have such outstanding leadership.
    I'm going to point out my theory again. For working class people down the pub calling someone shagger is not an insult

    On Topic I think Boris is a double edged sword. He is probably the most likely to motivate the cohort of Tory supporters, but does repel other possible Tory voters, and well I can't be the only one to think there is a clear danger of him completely screwing up. I think that explains the difference between current leads and likely future government.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,487

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    That's absolutely fantastic news mate. Well done.

    My wife started off as a paralegal on a shite salary. 8 years later she's a qualified in-house commercial lawyer and earns nearly £75k pa + bonus.

    Hang on in there. It will come.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    Charles said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    Secondary education for girls is fantastic in driving down radical extremism among young men...
    Yes, the benefits are social as well as economic.

    One reason that Pakistan is so fanatical is that in many rural areas civil education is rubbish, and the only option for the poor is the Madrassahs, but what they teach! 🙄
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited April 2021
    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    But you’re peddling stuff that is years out of date - like producing a report from the Second World War during my childhood. You seem to be posting from prejudice - in the literal sense of having decided what outcome you will argue prior to very much analysis.

    Female education is absolutely key, not least as the one thing that most significantly reduces the birth rate and therefore the risk that Africa (and pretty much only Africa, nowadays) faces from population growth. Low cost interventions of the sort managed by VSO can make a massive difference - I have seen it myself first hand - and it is tragic that political posturing by this government is putting much of this work at risk.

    Where I disagree with Foxy is that I have a strong disregard for many of the religious charities that go peddling their propaganda on the back of their aid. The way some of them behave in the field is sometimes shameless. Aid is better delivered by organisations that aren’t trying to peddle politics or religion at the same time.

    It always strikes me as odd that funding lost to corruption or inefficiency is postulated as somehow unique to foreign aid programmes. I wonder what proportion of UK government spending or local government spending is ‘lost’ to corrupt or inefficient practices? The difference, I guess, is that the way this works in the developed world is usually more sophisticated than taking wads of cash in envelopes or ambushing goods off the back of a lorry. Although not always. Cf. Cash for questions, or the current state of Liverpool council.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,487
    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    Yes, betting on general elections this far out is a mug's game.
    I have an 18-month rule on them.

    So, I will be taking an interest towards the end of next year - not before - and perhaps not even until 2023.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    The sad thing is that the EPL are fine with body bags in embassies, the thing that stopped the takeover, which I flagged up before was, is that the EPL take their copyright and media contracts very seriously, it was the Saudi government's assault on BEIN Sports and support for the pirate boxes of BEQOut is what scuppered the deal.
    Every time you think that you are getting a little cynical someone shows that you are actually a bit naïve. Such is life.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,710
    edited April 2021
    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    But you’re peddling stuff that is years out of date - like producing a report from the Second World War during my childhood. You seem to be posting from prejudice - in the literal sense of having decided what outcome you will argue prior to very much analysis.

    Female education is absolutely key, not least as the one thing that most significantly reduces the birth rate and therefore the risk that Africa (and pretty much only Africa, nowadays) faces from population growth. Low cost interventions of the sort managed by VSO can make a massive difference - I have seen it myself first hand - and it is tragic that political posturing by this government is putting much of this work at risk.

    Where I disagree with Foxy is that I have a strong disregard for many of the religious charities that go peddling their propaganda on the back of their aid. The way some of them behave in the field is sometimes shameless. Aid is better delivered by organisations that aren’t trying to peddle politics or religion at the same time.

    It always strikes me as odd that funding lost to corruption or inefficiency is postulated as somehow unique to foreign aid programmes. I wonder what proportion of UK government spending or local government spending is ‘lost’ to corrupt or inefficient practices? The difference, I guess, is that the way this works in the developed world is usually more sophisticated than taking wads of cash in envelopes or ambushing goods off the back of a lorry. Although not always. Cf. Cash for questions, or the current state of Liverpool council.
    My experience of Africa is that the locals are far more fervent, and usually bit more Biblically literate than the overseas staff. Africa is a very religious continent, far more so than Europe, or even North America.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    If the rest of the world had come close to matching "Shagger's" (as you insist on calling him) performance in vaccine delivery they would be viable but sadly very few countries in the world have such outstanding leadership.
    I'm going to point out my theory again. For working class people down the pub calling someone shagger is not an insult

    On Topic I think Boris is a double edged sword. He is probably the most likely to motivate the cohort of Tory supporters, but does repel other possible Tory voters, and well I can't be the only one to think there is a clear danger of him completely screwing up. I think that explains the difference between current leads and likely future government.
    The risk of catastrophe with Boris is always present but he does reach parts of the electorate that would never normally think of voting Tory. As you say he does this at the cost of irritating fiscal conservatives like me but he judges we have nowhere else to go, just as the left didn't under Blair.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited April 2021

    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    Yes, betting on general elections this far out is a mug's game.
    I have an 18-month rule on them.

    So, I will be taking an interest towards the end of next year - not before - and perhaps not even until 2023.
    A strategy that is doubtless mostly wise, but you do miss out on opportunities to sell the favourite at a time when you judge it is overbought. Such a strategy can work very well for ‘next leader’ markets - for example I did very well laying JRM when he was favourite for next Tory leader and being regularly touted on PB by some of the Tory fanclub.

    The same principle applies to other GE bets - for example it’s a reasonable view that the current circumstances, of the population being rescued from the virus by the vaccination programme - represents a uniquely favourable circumstance for the government in office, from which the large majority of possible future trajectories are likely to be downwards. If you buy this view then there is money to be made selling the Tories now, expecting to buy back at better odds when the inevitable next stormy patch comes along.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:


    Cancelling Olympics remains an option, says Japan official

    A senior Japanese ruling party official said cancelling this year’s Olympics in Tokyo remains an option if the coronavirus crisis becomes too dire, as a fourth wave of infections surges less than 100 days from the planned start of the Games, Reuters reports.

    I think that this has become inevitable given the incredibly slow roll out of vaccines in Japan. If they wanted to do the Olympics they would have had to be vaccinating at at least UK levels with all their vulnerable already done. They are a long way from that. Has anyone heard of late from @edmundintokyo ? I haven't seen him on for quite a while.
    Yes it would be good to hear from him.

    Is the dogged insistence the games go ahead regardless a face issue or a cash issue? If the latter is it being driven by the IOC demanding their billions? I would imagine the Japanese have built Olympic facilities that can be used ongoing unlike some other host cities.

    Holding the games this summer would be madness. I know some anti-lockdown people on here insist the pox is over and we can and MUST return to status quo ante on the date set by Shagger, but in the real world it is still everywhere...
    If the rest of the world had come close to matching "Shagger's" (as you insist on calling him) performance in vaccine delivery they would be viable but sadly very few countries in the world have such outstanding leadership.
    I'm going to point out my theory again. For working class people down the pub calling someone shagger is not an insult

    On Topic I think Boris is a double edged sword. He is probably the most likely to motivate the cohort of Tory supporters, but does repel other possible Tory voters, and well I can't be the only one to think there is a clear danger of him completely screwing up. I think that explains the difference between current leads and likely future government.
    You know nothing of the working class.

    As an expert in the working classes I will tell you that if you a call a woman 'shagger' then you're eating teeth as they and their partner consider it an insult.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,533

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    Congratulations and all the best.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited April 2021
    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    But you’re peddling stuff that is years out of date - like producing a report from the Second World War during my childhood. You seem to be posting from prejudice - in the literal sense of having decided what outcome you will argue prior to very much analysis.

    Female education is absolutely key, not least as the one thing that most significantly reduces the birth rate and therefore the risk that Africa (and pretty much only Africa, nowadays) faces from population growth. Low cost interventions of the sort managed by VSO can make a massive difference - I have seen it myself first hand - and it is tragic that political posturing by this government is putting much of this work at risk.

    Where I disagree with Foxy is that I have a strong disregard for many of the religious charities that go peddling their propaganda on the back of their aid. The way some of them behave in the field is sometimes shameless. Aid is better delivered by organisations that aren’t trying to peddle politics or religion at the same time.

    It always strikes me as odd that funding lost to corruption or inefficiency is postulated as somehow unique to foreign aid programmes. I wonder what proportion of UK government spending or local government spending is ‘lost’ to corrupt or inefficient practices? The difference, I guess, is that the way this works in the developed world is usually more sophisticated than taking wads of cash in envelopes or ambushing goods off the back of a lorry. Although not always. Cf. Cash for questions, or the current state of Liverpool council.
    My experience of Africa is that the locals are far more fervent, and usually bit more Biblically literate than the overseas staff. Africa is a very religious continent, far more so than Europe, or even North America.

    There is still competition between different flavours of religion, and the circumstance you describe offers more fertile territory for these parasitical modern day missionaries than they would find wandering up and down Oxford Street.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,720
    I doubt that Starmer's 'Tory sleaze' redux (is Mandelson advising him?) will go anywhere. The transplant from the 1990s doesn't fit the world of the 2020s.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,487
    IanB2 said:

    Fishing said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    Yes, betting on general elections this far out is a mug's game.
    I have an 18-month rule on them.

    So, I will be taking an interest towards the end of next year - not before - and perhaps not even until 2023.
    A strategy that is doubtless mostly wise, but you do miss out on opportunities to sell the favourite at a time when you judge it is overbought. Such a strategy can work very well for ‘next leader’ markets - for example I did very well laying JRM when he was favourite for next Tory leader and being regularly touted on PB by some of the Tory fanclub.

    The same principle applies to other GE bets - for example it’s a reasonable view that the current circumstances, of the population being rescued from the virus by the vaccination programme - represents a uniquely favourable circumstance for the government in office, from which the large majority of future trajectories are likely to be downwards. If you buy this view then there is money to be made selling the Tories now, expecting to buy back at better odds when the inevitable next stormy patch comes along.
    Yes, it's different to the next PM / next leader markets where there are bigger price spreads and more opportunities for change.

    I'm playing those already. I laid Nigel Farage at 80/1 for next PM the other day - which was an easy £5.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,920

    Good news everyone. I’ve been offered, and have accepted, a role as a paralegal at a fairly prestigious commercial law firm in the North of England in their engineering and construction team.

    The salary is pants but it’s a great opportunity and the team seems lovely — I hope it pays off.

    That's absolutely fantastic news mate. Well done.

    My wife started off as a paralegal on a shite salary. 8 years later she's a qualified in-house commercial lawyer and earns nearly £75k pa + bonus.

    Hang on in there. It will come.
    And if you get fed up with the law, last night's 2021 Masterchef champion is also from Newcastle.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    edited April 2021
    ydoethur said:



    I don’t know. Remember Maria Sharapova’s heart condition? :wink:

    When Tyler Hamilton was on the "Lance" program (ie EPO, Human Growth Hormone, Insulin, Testosterone, Steroids and Perrier) at US Postal he had to be woken up several times a night to make sure he didn't die in his sleep from heart failure. In pro cycling we call it "being professional".
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited April 2021

    May I add my congratulations to PB's newly appointed paralegal.

    But I'm still puzzled by why we need legal professionals to jump out of aeroplanes.

    The more pertinent question is surely why we need to give these lawyers a parachute?
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Paging @Gallowgate

    Boris Johnson was lobbied by killer Saudi prince: Prime Minister acted on personal plea from Mohammed Bin Salman over 'axed' £300m deal to buy Newcastle United football club... now it may be back on

    Mohammed Bin Salman urged PM to 'correct and reconsider' a 'wrong' decision

    Premier League was accused of blocking a £300m takeover of Newcastle United

    The angry crown prince warned that Anglo-Saudi relations would be damaged

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472051/Boris-Johnson-lobbied-Saudi-prince-Prime-Minister-acted-plea-Mohammed-Bin-Salman.html

    I am tempted to suggest that even the EPL might think that having a critic leaving an embassy in several different body bags falls a tad short of the fit and proper person test but I suppose it might depend upon the money.
    The sad thing is that the EPL are fine with body bags in embassies, the thing that stopped the takeover, which I flagged up before was, is that the EPL take their copyright and media contracts very seriously, it was the Saudi government's assault on BEIN Sports and support for the pirate boxes of BEQOut is what scuppered the deal.
    Every time you think that you are getting a little cynical someone shows that you are actually a bit naïve. Such is life.
    The deal fell apart when The Public Investment Fund said they had nothing to do with the Saudi state.

    Here's the board of The Public Investment Fund.

    H.E. Yasir Othman Al-Rumayyan - Governor of the Public Investment Fund

    H.E. Mohamed Mazyed Altwaijri - Advisor at the Royal Court

    H.E. Mohammed Abdullah Al-Jadaan - Minister of Finance

    H.E. Khalid Abdulaziz Al-Falih - Minister of Investment

    H.E. Ahmed Aqeel Al-Khateeb - Minister of Tourism

    H.E. Mohammad Abdul Malek Al Shaikh - Minister of State and member of the Saudi Council of Ministers

    H.E. Dr. Majid Abdullah Al Qasabi - Minister of Commerce

    H.E. Dr. Ibrahim Abdulaziz Al-Assaf - Minister of State and member of the Saudi Council of Ministers

    and last and not least, this chap, who nobody has heard about.

    His Royal Highness Mohammad bin Salman Al-Saud - Crown Prince, Deputy Prime Minister, Chairman of the Council of Economic and Development Affairs, Chairman of the Public Investment Fund.

    But of course the Saudi Public Investment Fund has nothing to do with the government of Saudi Arabia because they said so.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,983

    One of our neighbours has erected a large marquee in the paddock behind their house.

    I await developments with interest...

    Probably best to take the curtains down completely, you'll get a far better view of their comings and goings.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,388
    I'm following up some trails on allegations of sleaze/revolving doors, and wonder whether Francis Maude Associates (FMA) may soon be highlighted more. Simone Finn, from there, is now the PM's Deputy Chief of Staff. FMA's senior team comprises Maude, P. Hammond, and three Nicks - Soames, Boles and Hurd. It strikes me that they all have something in common. Of course, just because something looks like a dodgy way of lining the pockets of ex-ministers doesn't mean that it is, so I make no allegations of impropriety, just curiosity.

    For anybody interested, the range of services they offer to government can be seen by browsing their website:

    https://fma.com/
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298
    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    There are a lot a lot of studies that try to link the amount of aid a country receives --> increases in GDP.
    IMO not a good idea to rely on these kind of cross-country regressions. With the right level of data mining and selection of control variables, you can achieve almost any result.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,428
    edited April 2021
    IanB2 said:

    From Dr Tang’s new study just published in the BMJ:

    The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 after touching surfaces is now considered to be relatively minimal.

    So can we please stop all the pointless washing of hands and constant spraying of surfaces?
    I note from Radio 5 this morning that the government quietly dropped advice to quarantine items in shops back in November, and that you can now use changing rooms to try on garments. There seems to be no appetite to bring this science up to date more widely.
    Just too confusing?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    But you’re peddling stuff that is years out of date - like producing a report from the Second World War during my childhood. You seem to be posting from prejudice - in the literal sense of having decided what outcome you will argue prior to very much analysis.

    Female education is absolutely key, not least as the one thing that most significantly reduces the birth rate and therefore the risk that Africa (and pretty much only Africa, nowadays) faces from population growth. Low cost interventions of the sort managed by VSO can make a massive difference - I have seen it myself first hand - and it is tragic that political posturing by this government is putting much of this work at risk.

    Where I disagree with Foxy is that I have a strong disregard for many of the religious charities that go peddling their propaganda on the back of their aid. The way some of them behave in the field is sometimes shameless. Aid is better delivered by organisations that aren’t trying to peddle politics or religion at the same time.

    It always strikes me as odd that funding lost to corruption or inefficiency is postulated as somehow unique to foreign aid programmes. I wonder what proportion of UK government spending or local government spending is ‘lost’ to corrupt or inefficient practices? The difference, I guess, is that the way this works in the developed world is usually more sophisticated than taking wads of cash in envelopes or ambushing goods off the back of a lorry. Although not always. Cf. Cash for questions, or the current state of Liverpool council.
    My experience of Africa is that the locals are far more fervent, and usually bit more Biblically literate than the overseas staff. Africa is a very religious continent, far more so than Europe, or even North America.

    There is still competition between different flavours of religion, and the circumstance you describe offers more fertile territory for these parasitical modern day missionaries than they would find wandering up and down Oxford Street.
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    DavidL said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that no overall majority is way overpriced although there are also half a dozen seats in Scotland vulnerable to the SNP. My expectation, given where we are starting from + the boundary review is that there will be a smaller Conservative majority although a larger one cannot be ruled out. Either way this clearly has to be the favourite.

    So what could bring us back to no overall majority? Economic disaster possibly but this government has not and will not hesitate to spend its way out of trouble if they can. The next year and a half, possibly 2 according to the IMF, will have strong growth on the back of that stimulus but by 2024 a recession is possible. Corruption and sleaze is something Tory governments are prone to. Losing Scotland in a referendum would not go down well. There are possibilities but the probability at the moment seems to me Labour going nowhere fast, the Lib Dems struggling to make an impact and the Tories cruising in a post UKIP world.

    Personally, I would reckon a small Tory majority is most likely, and a Labour majority extremely unlikely.

    The last 5 years have seen incredible political volatility though, and the pandemic has not yet peaked in most of the world. Indeed the record increases in case numbers in much of Asia and their low vaccination rate looks very ominous. The economic and political consequences of this are hugely unpredictable. I think it too far off to wage significant sums on 2024.
    I agree with all of that. 2022 is going to be about vaccinating the rest of the world and it is going to be hard work. The flack that AZ have got will make it much harder too.

    Interestingly, my son is doing his advanced higher dissertation for economics at the moment. Various sources and analysis shows that the best outcome for foreign aid is zero benefit for the recipient country. Most aid is actually detrimental to growth and destabilises the economy of the recipient. The one possible exception to that is medical aid, provided it is delivered direct and does not get bled into corruption. Our aid budget should almost exclusively be focused on the delivery of vaccines for at least the next 2 years, arguably 3.
    I would be curious as to what aid he is looking at. From memory on a micro level direct cash aid does work in lifting people out of poverty and ensuring children attend school.
    In brief:
    The UN has somewhat optimistically estimated the proportion of aid lost to corruption at 30%; Hadjimichael and Reichel in 1995 found a negative correlation between savings and aid, Boone found aid helps consumption rather than investment, food aid is highly damaging to domestic production and financial aid tends to result in an over valuation of the recipient's currency damaging exports.

    The body of evidence on this is increasingly overwhelming. What countries need is institutional stability, the rule of law, the ability to trade more effectively with us (lower, non reciprocal tariff cuts) and peace (the economic cost of civil wars being far greater than the immediate damage as FDI is reduced and capital is a major issue for all LEDCs). Effective healthcare facilitates growth but it does come with many of these other problems. (this is a summary of 5.5k words).
    I would agree with much of that, but please do note that 1995 is a quarter century ago, and covered the post Colonial period from mid Sixties to late Eighties, when much aid was big ticket items and often part of influence buying during the Cold War. That is why DFID was formed, and aid shifted to smaller projects, and via NGOs rather than government, as well as opening up markets by initiatives such as the EBA scheme when we were in the EU.

    I have worked in some small medical aid projects in Africa and Asia, via Christian organisations. A lot of good work is done medically and educationally. I believe there is reasonable evidence that programmes for female literacy have the most positive effect on GDP overall, and unsurprisingly military aid the most negative.

    The correlation between increased educational attainment and growth is much weaker than you might think. LEDCs suffer a constant brain drain (just look at our NHS) of their most educated to developed countries because institutional instability and expropriation make it more difficult to gain from the achievement domestically. There is some evidence that the diaspora of the brain drain do feed resources back to the country of origin but the gain is marginal at best.

    The type of project you have worked on (and huge respect for that by the way) is one of the things that can help but Covid is a massive threat to growth in Africa, just as the AIDs epidemic and Ebola in Sierra Leone/West Africa have been in the past.
    But you’re peddling stuff that is years out of date - like producing a report from the Second World War during my childhood. You seem to be posting from prejudice - in the literal sense of having decided what outcome you will argue prior to very much analysis.

    Female education is absolutely key, not least as the one thing that most significantly reduces the birth rate and therefore the risk that Africa (and pretty much only Africa, nowadays) faces from population growth. Low cost interventions of the sort managed by VSO can make a massive difference - I have seen it myself first hand - and it is tragic that political posturing by this government is putting much of this work at risk.

    Where I disagree with Foxy is that I have a strong disregard for many of the religious charities that go peddling their propaganda on the back of their aid. The way some of them behave in the field is sometimes shameless. Aid is better delivered by organisations that aren’t trying to peddle politics or religion at the same time.

    It always strikes me as odd that funding lost to corruption or inefficiency is postulated as somehow unique to foreign aid programmes. I wonder what proportion of UK government spending or local government spending is ‘lost’ to corrupt or inefficient practices? The difference, I guess, is that the way this works in the developed world is usually more sophisticated than taking wads of cash in envelopes or ambushing goods off the back of a lorry. Although not always. Cf. Cash for questions, or the current state of Liverpool council.
    My experience of Africa is that the locals are far more fervent, and usually bit more Biblically literate than the overseas staff. Africa is a very religious continent, far more so than Europe, or even North America.

    There is still competition between different flavours of religion, and the circumstance you describe offers more fertile territory for these parasitical modern day missionaries than they would find wandering up and down Oxford Street.
    I am an atheist who believes that religion is a blight on the world but even I would not dispute for a moment that those motivated by it can do a lot of good because of their beliefs. Your attack on @Foxy is unwarranted.

    My son (it is not my argument although I find it persuasive) does not argue that education, especially for girls, is not a good thing. What he argues and seems to vouch by analysis is that it does not lead to growth or even economic stability on its own. The interesting question is why not? The brain drain seems to be a major part of the answer as does the need for institutions that facilitate growth in the country.
This discussion has been closed.