Howdy, Stranger!

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

That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 24 in General
imageThat YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier – politicalbetting.com

Back in mid July I wrote here that backing LAB to get a poll lead during the remaining part of 2021 looked like a good bet. First amongst my reason was there was always the possibility of an outlier. The context for the post was a then new Smarkets market on when Labour would next get a poll lead.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • eekeek Posts: 14,809
    2 weeks later and it's not surprising that people have forgotten that NI is going up in April.

    Time will tell.
  • Out of interest, where was our 'Australian points-based visa system' in this driver-shortage crisis? Weren't HGV drivers allowed maximum points? If not why not?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,723
    You don't think?
    CHB won his bet though.
    Am thinking electricity shortages in China may be the most important ones.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 67,956
    2 wickets needed..
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 3,833
    Odd that, an opinion poll out on its own, and fitting the hopes of a well known poster (financial gain AND his favorite party), proving to be an outlier? Who'd have thought it? We never learn.
  • "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 14,550
    Selebian said:

    Carnyx said:

    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Completely off-topic: my autistic train-obsessed nephew has just sent me a video of a train going past captioned 'Deltic!'. Thanks to previous discussions on PB, I was able to reply semi-knowledgeably rather than simply asking "what's a Deltic?" :smile:

    (I'm not yet equipped to judge whether it is, indeed, a Deltic, but I think I'll take his word for it)

    Has he seen this?

    image

    I find it almost hypnotic...
    I shall forward the wiki-page :smile: Crikey, I'm going to look like a really know some stuff!
    I don't know if you saw my posting the last time we discussed Deltics - I mentioned I'd recently found the Deltic engine manual for Ton class minesweepers in the papers of my late father (ex Navy).
    I can't remember whether it was you or OnlyLivingBoy (or both) who enlightened me when I asked in an earlier discusson what a Deltic was. Think I missed your message about the engine manual though.

    Either way, even though I'm not a train (or large diesel engine?) buff, I'm finding this diversion more pleasant and interesting than the circular debate over the, as yet unclear, consequences of Brexit for those in low paid jobs.
    FPT ( but it is Friday, and I'll be opening the wine soon)

    The other thing I said which you might have missed is that I remember being taken by Dad to see a Deltic at Waverley Station abd being allowed inside by the driver - including the engine compartment. I'd just assumed when thinking about it it was to keep a small boy happy - but it only dawned on me when writing the address for his funeral that of course the opportunity to see the same engines as in his minesweeper would have been irresistible and an instant open sesame to the driver.

    BTW ISTR the Ton class minesweepers were one of the biggest defence programmes ever in the UK - I believe surpassing the Polaris deterrent? The fear of mine warfare if the cold war turned hot. Many were built and then parked in estuaries with temporary roofs, like Nelson-era frigates 'in ordinary'.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,809

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
  • The Government made a terrible decision caving in and raising taxes.

    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Two strikes now in baseball terms. Its not looking good - but then we see Starmer and there's nothing better there.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
  • Several petrol stations around where I live either now have long queues or are already clsoed.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,489
    Scotland’s National, the Cybernat Beano, fakes a series of tweets. You couldn’t make it up. Hold on! They did.

    https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1441395966838407173?s=20
  • "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    Labour would have to be seen as being able to deal with this crisis better and with Starmer absent from the media for two weeks, and the recent polling, labour may continue to struggle
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 1,454
    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    I think they are closet sado-masochists to be honest.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,489


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,723
    Further to this. Am increasingly of the opinion that Xi's internal crackdown and bellicosity is a sign of weakness not strength. The PRC survives on the bargain that folk get ever richer. And the poor can aspire to be rich. This is looking shaky post-Covid.
    Xi's faction is not the only one in the CCP. Not by a long chalk.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    edited September 24
    MaxPB said:

    Shell saying it's bringing forwards deliveries to forecourts. In this weird alternate universe that's apparently impossible and the man from Shell must be lying because the UK has got no tanker drivers.

    I was once on a trip to Qatar to see Shell's giant Pearl gas-to-liquids plant. On the bus from Doha, I found myself sitting next to a really interesting guy, who was one layer down from the main Shell board. He ran the multi-billion pound revenue, Shell UK service and petrol station business. At the end of the ride, we swapped business cards. His read:

    "Manager, Shell Retail (UK)".

  • Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    If its below the minimum wage for MPs then that will say it all, won't it?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,967
    That Yougov had a big move from the Tories to RefUK and DK rather than just to Labour which seems to have now returned to the blues
  • eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 44,967
    edited September 24


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
  • eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    Generally Boris says something like Aussie good Frenchies bad and all is forgiven.
  • Out of interest, where was our 'Australian points-based visa system' in this driver-shortage crisis? Weren't HGV drivers allowed maximum points? If not why not?

    We needed to prioritise the immigration of political advisors instead.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,967
    eek said:

    2 weeks later and it's not surprising that people have forgotten that NI is going up in April.

    Time will tell.

    Which is why next year's May local elections may not be great for the Tories as the NI rise and pensions triple lock freeze comes in on people's paycheques and bank balances the month before.

    Hence Rishi will also likely need a tax cut before the next general election
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,594
    edited September 24

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    Labour would have to be seen as being able to deal with this crisis better and with Starmer absent from the media for two weeks, and the recent polling, labour may continue to struggle
    It's not going to help him that Rayner is breaking ranks on the voting issue today.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/24/angela-rayner-questions-starmer-labour-leadership-rule-changes

    He can't sack her, so he may have to back away from her and others somewhat. If Labour can get a muted peace and deferment on this issue to some indefinite point in the future, and the polls tank for the tories, as they might, he might still have a chance at a better lead-in to next week.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    On the subject of the YouGov: the LD + Green total of 19% is pretty punchy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,967
    Hillary Clinton installed as chancellor of Queen's University Belfast
    https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/1441411150219026432?s=20
  • rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
    So how does a government solve housing costs without ensuring they lose the next election?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,723
    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    Yes. Except it doesn't. The Tory share has been falling by tiny increments since the beginning of June. Down around 5 points. Labour up by around 2. Still a long way to achieve parity, but that is the trend.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,416
    rcs1000 said:

    On the subject of the YouGov: the LD + Green total of 19% is pretty punchy.

    The Daffodil coalition.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,182
    Perhaps today's YouGov is also an outlier - YouGov has a habit of throwing out odd numbers for parties occasionally.

    It'll be interesting to see how and indeed if the polling in Iceland and Germany reflects the final results over the weekend.

    This is all part of a process which may be long or short as those who previously supported the Government have doubts, then become disillusioned, look for alternatives and then finally commit to changing their vote.

    The unusual politics of the EU Referendum and Covid have created an atypical period since 2016 - as with so much else, it seems, what we will return to you isn't what it was before but a "new normal".
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 14,550

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    Generally Boris says something like Aussie good Frenchies bad and all is forgiven.
    Except by the French. Ils n'ont pas la mémoire d'un poisson rouge.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 2,454
    edited September 24


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    If its below the minimum wage for MPs then that will say it all, won't it?
    I would be open to importing MPs to fill the skills shortage in politics in this country...
  • eekeek Posts: 14,809

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,082
    ...

    The Government made a terrible decision caving in and raising taxes.

    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Two strikes now in baseball terms. Its not looking good - but then we see Starmer and there's nothing better there.

    Using immigrant labour as an "in case of emergency, smash glass" last resort, when pay increases haven't attracted enough British workers to fill the void quickly enough, is perfectly acceptable in my book.

    Flooding the market with cheap labour as a policy was the problem, that we seem to have resolved
  • TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    So the problem which apparently according to Leavers wasn’t made worse by Brexit will be alleviated by removing some of the restrictions placed on EU drivers by Brexit .

    Leavers need to stop embarrassing themselves . They seem to be running down a rabbit hole and flailing as to how they can continue to polish the Brexit turd!

    Remainers need to stop embarrassing themselves. Leavers are saying its a good thing not a problem.
    I’m happy to see wages going up for drivers , equally the pragmatic solution until more U.K. drivers can be hired is to temporarily relax the visa rules . This seems like common sense whereas sticking to your stance re this issue seems to be hoping the problem will magically go away overnight . How can supply shortages and problems with supply chains be a good thing .
    So-called "problems" force people to pay the real market rate. Drivers get to go to whichever "predatory pay rise" (TM Rochdale) gets offered to them, the firms get to move whichever goods companies are prepared to pay enough to get moved - and the freeloaders at the bottom of the pyramid fall out.
    The problem with your argument is that it's not the freeloaders who are falling out.

    Its the greater hassle fuel and coolchain hauliers who have immediate problems because the extra money they pay is now not worth the extra hassle.
    The biggie was when the pay fiesta hit the tanker drivers. I assume that Hoyer et al have responded with their own pay rises so they will recruit drivers back which will fill the gaps. Until the next round of poaching when we go back to shortages again and again.

    Thing is, if you are an ADR driver the country really needs you driving fuel and toxic chemicals, not sofas. "Just pay more" is fine and they will and are. But as you lose and then poach back drivers you have gaps and that means fuel shortages.
    Then maybe don't lose them. Maybe pay them more in the first place and when they hand in their notice, maybe stop and think "oh I'll need to pay even more than this".

    If you keep having pathetically small pay rises under the circumstances then yes that will be a problem. Its a problem you need to fix though not have the state fix it for you.
    38% is "pathetically small"?

    How much should a pay rise be to (a) keep existing drivers and (b) cover any and all possible pay rises by competitors? I've managed a lot of salary budgets and recruited talent where you have to pay to keep them. Never managed a speculative +80% or +180% just in case the rival down the road increases their offer.
    If you haven't filled your vacancies then yes it is.

    The benchmark I'm using is I know truckers in the States can be on over $100k per annum. What did your piddly 38% (34% if we exclude the 2.5% inflation only rise) pay rise in the circumstances increase pay upto out of curiosity?
    "Your piddly 38% pay rise"

    Careful. Your trolling about this is very high grade but you've now become complacent. And this is just to see how much you can get away with. Don't blow it.
    I'm not trolling.

    For months now Rochdale and others have been saying that there's this humongous crisis in the industry with 100,000 extra staff needed. The refrain time and again was pay more to get the vacancies paid.

    I for one did not mean a 38% pay rise as being the limit for that. Yes if it means a 100% pay rise or more to fill the vacancies then JFDI applies.

    If you want to increase the pool of drivers by 33% then I see no reason why they must be paid less than MPs for instance.
    Time for some back of the envelope maths.

    Give 300k truck drivers £40k salary increases is an extra £12bn filtering through to costs for UK plc. Over £400 per household.

    And that is just one industry, there will be other wage rises we have to fund too, we have tax increases, energy increases as well.

    Something is going to break, and it will be government promises around controlling migration.
    I am not at all sure where your 300k truck drivers are to receive an additional £40K pa to their existing salary

    They have seen increases but not of that magnitude

    Or am I missing something
    It is PT's "unusual" solution of increasing pay by 100%, not that of anyone responsible for this in the real world.
    How is that "unusual" if you want to fill 100k vacancies from within this country? Its just supply and demand

    If you don't want to fill 100k vacancies then yes fair enough don't raise prices to the appropriate market rate. But if you do, you charge whatever you need to and pay whatever you need to.

    That's the going rate in the USA. I see no reason it shouldn't be the going rate in this country. Do you?

  • Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
  • isamisam Posts: 38,082
    edited September 24

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    Yes, this time last year the average of the last ten Conservative scores was 40.8, and now it's 39.8

    Labour's was 38.3 and now it's 35.1



  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,182
    dixiedean said:

    Further to this. Am increasingly of the opinion that Xi's internal crackdown and bellicosity is a sign of weakness not strength. The PRC survives on the bargain that folk get ever richer. And the poor can aspire to be rich. This is looking shaky post-Covid.
    Xi's faction is not the only one in the CCP. Not by a long chalk.

    I also suspect as people get richer they want to have more say in their lives, how their money is spent and what they can and can't do. There will come a point when the Chinese economy won't deliver as it has unless it moves into new areas rather than traditional industrialisation.

    China has opted for economic imperialism in Africa - to be fair, the West has not responded in kind or certainly not to the same scale. I suppose one could argue the Chinese are strictly amoral about this - they don't care who is in charge as long as stability is maintained for their economic progress.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    edited September 24
    MaxPB said:

    Shell saying it's bringing forwards deliveries to forecourts. In this weird alternate universe that's apparently impossible and the man from Shell must be lying because the UK has got no tanker drivers.

    Britain also has no petrol shortages so that is another reason Shell must be lying. :wink:
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 3,833

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    Maybe Starmer could spend some time writing a long essay about what he and Labour stand for, so we can all see the choice? You now, policies, his take on the way ahead? That sort of thing.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.

    The numbers are beginning to develop in a way that could see the Tories lose their majority, that is true. But it would need determined tactical voting. I think we need to see the Tories down to 37% or so on a regular basis, without a lot of DKs and shifts to RUK, before anything other than them winning outright next time becomes a serious possibility. We are a long way from that currently.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupation-codes

    is the rates/occupations
  • rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
    So how does a government solve housing costs without ensuring they lose the next election?
    *Just pay people more*

    If for a few years wages rise by 9%, CPI prices by 5% and house prices by 1% then within five years there'd have been a 31% real term reduction in house price to earnings ratios - but nobody would have gone into negative equity.

    We need wage inflation. Oh and it'd deflate debt to GDP and it'd boost the Exchequer via fiscal drag.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 9,983

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
    So how does a government solve housing costs without ensuring they lose the next election?
    There are a few interesting policies by Labour this week, and some rather loopy ones by Manchester Council discussed at lunchtime.

    It comes down to removing market distortions, continuing to boost supply, and stop inflating the demand side.
  • "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    Labour would have to be seen as being able to deal with this crisis better and with Starmer absent from the media for two weeks, and the recent polling, labour may continue to struggle
    It's not going to help him that Rayner is breaking ranks on the voting issue today.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/24/angela-rayner-questions-starmer-labour-leadership-rule-changes

    He can't sack her, so he may have to back away from her and others somewhat. If Labour can get a muted peace and deferment on this issue to some indefinite point in the future, and the polls tank for the tories, as they might, he might still have a chance at a better lead-in to next week.

    The prize for Starmer is not the leadership election rule change, it is the MP de/reselection one. If he can get that through it will be very significant.

  • TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    So the problem which apparently according to Leavers wasn’t made worse by Brexit will be alleviated by removing some of the restrictions placed on EU drivers by Brexit .

    Leavers need to stop embarrassing themselves . They seem to be running down a rabbit hole and flailing as to how they can continue to polish the Brexit turd!

    Remainers need to stop embarrassing themselves. Leavers are saying its a good thing not a problem.
    I’m happy to see wages going up for drivers , equally the pragmatic solution until more U.K. drivers can be hired is to temporarily relax the visa rules . This seems like common sense whereas sticking to your stance re this issue seems to be hoping the problem will magically go away overnight . How can supply shortages and problems with supply chains be a good thing .
    So-called "problems" force people to pay the real market rate. Drivers get to go to whichever "predatory pay rise" (TM Rochdale) gets offered to them, the firms get to move whichever goods companies are prepared to pay enough to get moved - and the freeloaders at the bottom of the pyramid fall out.
    The problem with your argument is that it's not the freeloaders who are falling out.

    Its the greater hassle fuel and coolchain hauliers who have immediate problems because the extra money they pay is now not worth the extra hassle.
    The biggie was when the pay fiesta hit the tanker drivers. I assume that Hoyer et al have responded with their own pay rises so they will recruit drivers back which will fill the gaps. Until the next round of poaching when we go back to shortages again and again.

    Thing is, if you are an ADR driver the country really needs you driving fuel and toxic chemicals, not sofas. "Just pay more" is fine and they will and are. But as you lose and then poach back drivers you have gaps and that means fuel shortages.
    Then maybe don't lose them. Maybe pay them more in the first place and when they hand in their notice, maybe stop and think "oh I'll need to pay even more than this".

    If you keep having pathetically small pay rises under the circumstances then yes that will be a problem. Its a problem you need to fix though not have the state fix it for you.
    38% is "pathetically small"?

    How much should a pay rise be to (a) keep existing drivers and (b) cover any and all possible pay rises by competitors? I've managed a lot of salary budgets and recruited talent where you have to pay to keep them. Never managed a speculative +80% or +180% just in case the rival down the road increases their offer.
    If you haven't filled your vacancies then yes it is.

    The benchmark I'm using is I know truckers in the States can be on over $100k per annum. What did your piddly 38% (34% if we exclude the 2.5% inflation only rise) pay rise in the circumstances increase pay upto out of curiosity?
    "Your piddly 38% pay rise"

    Careful. Your trolling about this is very high grade but you've now become complacent. And this is just to see how much you can get away with. Don't blow it.
    I'm not trolling.

    For months now Rochdale and others have been saying that there's this humongous crisis in the industry with 100,000 extra staff needed. The refrain time and again was pay more to get the vacancies paid.

    I for one did not mean a 38% pay rise as being the limit for that. Yes if it means a 100% pay rise or more to fill the vacancies then JFDI applies.

    If you want to increase the pool of drivers by 33% then I see no reason why they must be paid less than MPs for instance.
    Time for some back of the envelope maths.

    Give 300k truck drivers £40k salary increases is an extra £12bn filtering through to costs for UK plc. Over £400 per household.

    And that is just one industry, there will be other wage rises we have to fund too, we have tax increases, energy increases as well.

    Something is going to break, and it will be government promises around controlling migration.
    I am not at all sure where your 300k truck drivers are to receive an additional £40K pa to their existing salary

    They have seen increases but not of that magnitude

    Or am I missing something
    It is PT's "unusual" solution of increasing pay by 100%, not that of anyone responsible for this in the real world.
    How is that "unusual" if you want to fill 100k vacancies from within this country? Its just supply and demand

    If you don't want to fill 100k vacancies then yes fair enough don't raise prices to the appropriate market rate. But if you do, you charge whatever you need to and pay whatever you need to.

    That's the going rate in the USA. I see no reason it shouldn't be the going rate in this country. Do you?
    In isolation its fine. But there are millions of households who cannot afford £400 extra costs to pay for wage increases in just a single industry, on top of rising costs and taxes elsewhere. If that is the Brexit dividend the government will lose the next election. They don't want to so will allow much more migration than many Brexit voters want, but try and pretend it is temporary and less than it is.
  • The Government made a terrible decision caving in and raising taxes.

    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Two strikes now in baseball terms. Its not looking good - but then we see Starmer and there's nothing better there.

    The problem is that you wanted Brexit Britain to be an isolated petri dish for your own niche socio-economic experiments - broccoli pickers earning £60,000 a year etc. That's fine for someone posting on a blog, but Boris has elections to win. In the real world and away from his Telegraph columns, he's clearly realized he can no longer indulge in such flights of fancy.
  • From HMG website re visas

    To qualify for a Skilled Worker visa, you must:

    work for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office

    have a ‘certificate of sponsorship’ from your employer with information about the role you’ve been offered in the UK to do a job that’s on the list of eligible occupations

    Be paid a minimum salary - how much depends on the type of work you do. The specific eligibility depends on your job.

    You must have a confirmed job offer before you apply for your visa.

    You must be able to speak, read, write and understand English. You’ll usually need to prove your knowledge of English when you apply.

    If you’re not eligible for a Skilled Worker visa

    You may be eligible for another type of visa to work in the UK.

    Your visa can last for up to 5 years before you need to extend it. You’ll need to apply to extend or update your visa when it expires or if you change jobs or employer.

    You can apply to extend your visa as many times as you like as long as you still meet the eligibility requirements.

    After 5 years, you may be able to apply to settle permanently in the UK (also known as ‘indefinite leave to remain’). This gives you the right to live, work and study here for as long as you like, and apply for benefits if you’re eligible.

  • Cases in England up 5k again today. I think thats 6 days running.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 62,413
    edited September 24

    TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    So the problem which apparently according to Leavers wasn’t made worse by Brexit will be alleviated by removing some of the restrictions placed on EU drivers by Brexit .

    Leavers need to stop embarrassing themselves . They seem to be running down a rabbit hole and flailing as to how they can continue to polish the Brexit turd!

    Remainers need to stop embarrassing themselves. Leavers are saying its a good thing not a problem.
    I’m happy to see wages going up for drivers , equally the pragmatic solution until more U.K. drivers can be hired is to temporarily relax the visa rules . This seems like common sense whereas sticking to your stance re this issue seems to be hoping the problem will magically go away overnight . How can supply shortages and problems with supply chains be a good thing .
    So-called "problems" force people to pay the real market rate. Drivers get to go to whichever "predatory pay rise" (TM Rochdale) gets offered to them, the firms get to move whichever goods companies are prepared to pay enough to get moved - and the freeloaders at the bottom of the pyramid fall out.
    The problem with your argument is that it's not the freeloaders who are falling out.

    Its the greater hassle fuel and coolchain hauliers who have immediate problems because the extra money they pay is now not worth the extra hassle.
    The biggie was when the pay fiesta hit the tanker drivers. I assume that Hoyer et al have responded with their own pay rises so they will recruit drivers back which will fill the gaps. Until the next round of poaching when we go back to shortages again and again.

    Thing is, if you are an ADR driver the country really needs you driving fuel and toxic chemicals, not sofas. "Just pay more" is fine and they will and are. But as you lose and then poach back drivers you have gaps and that means fuel shortages.
    Then maybe don't lose them. Maybe pay them more in the first place and when they hand in their notice, maybe stop and think "oh I'll need to pay even more than this".

    If you keep having pathetically small pay rises under the circumstances then yes that will be a problem. Its a problem you need to fix though not have the state fix it for you.
    38% is "pathetically small"?

    How much should a pay rise be to (a) keep existing drivers and (b) cover any and all possible pay rises by competitors? I've managed a lot of salary budgets and recruited talent where you have to pay to keep them. Never managed a speculative +80% or +180% just in case the rival down the road increases their offer.
    If you haven't filled your vacancies then yes it is.

    The benchmark I'm using is I know truckers in the States can be on over $100k per annum. What did your piddly 38% (34% if we exclude the 2.5% inflation only rise) pay rise in the circumstances increase pay upto out of curiosity?
    "Your piddly 38% pay rise"

    Careful. Your trolling about this is very high grade but you've now become complacent. And this is just to see how much you can get away with. Don't blow it.
    I'm not trolling.

    For months now Rochdale and others have been saying that there's this humongous crisis in the industry with 100,000 extra staff needed. The refrain time and again was pay more to get the vacancies paid.

    I for one did not mean a 38% pay rise as being the limit for that. Yes if it means a 100% pay rise or more to fill the vacancies then JFDI applies.

    If you want to increase the pool of drivers by 33% then I see no reason why they must be paid less than MPs for instance.
    Time for some back of the envelope maths.

    Give 300k truck drivers £40k salary increases is an extra £12bn filtering through to costs for UK plc. Over £400 per household.

    And that is just one industry, there will be other wage rises we have to fund too, we have tax increases, energy increases as well.

    Something is going to break, and it will be government promises around controlling migration.
    I am not at all sure where your 300k truck drivers are to receive an additional £40K pa to their existing salary

    They have seen increases but not of that magnitude

    Or am I missing something
    It is PT's "unusual" solution of increasing pay by 100%, not that of anyone responsible for this in the real world.
    How is that "unusual" if you want to fill 100k vacancies from within this country? Its just supply and demand

    If you don't want to fill 100k vacancies then yes fair enough don't raise prices to the appropriate market rate. But if you do, you charge whatever you need to and pay whatever you need to.

    That's the going rate in the USA. I see no reason it shouldn't be the going rate in this country. Do you?
    In isolation its fine. But there are millions of households who cannot afford £400 extra costs to pay for wage increases in just a single industry, on top of rising costs and taxes elsewhere. If that is the Brexit dividend the government will lose the next election. They don't want to so will allow much more migration than many Brexit voters want, but try and pretend it is temporary and less than it is.
    Wage rises are going up in other sectors too.

    Taxes should be cut and wages rise, besides as wages rise that's more money for the exchequer anyway.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,489
    The big reason why pollsters should publish outlier polls is that it proves they're running an honest shop. Every poll has a margin of error, but remember that the margin of error (as traditionally reported) covers only 95% of all results. There is going to be that one out of 20 times when a result falls outside the margin of error.....

    When a pollster continuously produces results close to the average, it means something funky is going on. It could mean a pollster is not reporting outlier polls or somehow weighting their polls to match the average. That's bad science. Pollsters must and should have faith in their methods


    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/outlier-polls-analysis/index.html
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 2,454


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Wonder over what time period that is calculated? Could make quite a difference given recent increases...
  • The Government made a terrible decision caving in and raising taxes.

    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Two strikes now in baseball terms. Its not looking good - but then we see Starmer and there's nothing better there.

    The problem is that you wanted Brexit Britain to be an isolated petri dish for your own niche socio-economic experiments - broccoli pickers earning £60,000 a year etc. That's fine for someone posting on a blog, but Boris has elections to win. In the real world and away from his Telegraph columns, he's clearly realized he can no longer indulge in such flights of fancy.
    Paying people a decent working salary is not a flight of fancy.

    Why is the going rate for such drivers in the USA such an atrocious, horrific suggestion in this country? `

  • Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupation-codes

    is the rates/occupations
    Seems this is the important bit

    You must meet all of the following requirements to be eligible for a Skilled Worker visa:

    your job is eligible for this visa

    you’ll be working for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office

    you’ll be paid at least the minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing

    The minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing is whichever is the highest out of the following 3 options:

    £25,600 per year
    £10.10 per hour

    the ‘going rate’ for the type of work you’ll be doing
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,182

    MaxPB said:

    Shell saying it's bringing forwards deliveries to forecourts. In this weird alternate universe that's apparently impossible and the man from Shell must be lying because the UK has got no tanker drivers.

    Britain also has no petrol shortages so that is another reason Shell must be lying. :wink:
    The trouble is, once the panic starts, the fuel deliveries can't keep pace with the demand. The supply from each tanker is used up more quickly.

    I remember my mother queuing for three gallons of petrol (rationed) in 1974 and my father earnestly predicting there would be riots if petrol went above £1 a gallon.

    Strangely, twenty one years on from the 2000 crisis, we still incredibly dependent on and vulnerable to any interruption to petrol supplies.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,594
    edited September 24

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    Labour would have to be seen as being able to deal with this crisis better and with Starmer absent from the media for two weeks, and the recent polling, labour may continue to struggle
    It's not going to help him that Rayner is breaking ranks on the voting issue today.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/24/angela-rayner-questions-starmer-labour-leadership-rule-changes

    He can't sack her, so he may have to back away from her and others somewhat. If Labour can get a muted peace and deferment on this issue to some indefinite point in the future, and the polls tank for the tories, as they might, he might still have a chance at a better lead-in to next week.

    The prize for Starmer is not the leadership election rule change, it is the MP de/reselection one. If he can get that through it will be very significant.

    There might actually be less objection to that among many members, too. This whole episode has been quite ill-thought out overreach, almost publicly antagonistically so, and so I strongly suspect the hand of Mandy in it.
  • eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

  • TOPPING said:

    eek said:

    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    So the problem which apparently according to Leavers wasn’t made worse by Brexit will be alleviated by removing some of the restrictions placed on EU drivers by Brexit .

    Leavers need to stop embarrassing themselves . They seem to be running down a rabbit hole and flailing as to how they can continue to polish the Brexit turd!

    Remainers need to stop embarrassing themselves. Leavers are saying its a good thing not a problem.
    I’m happy to see wages going up for drivers , equally the pragmatic solution until more U.K. drivers can be hired is to temporarily relax the visa rules . This seems like common sense whereas sticking to your stance re this issue seems to be hoping the problem will magically go away overnight . How can supply shortages and problems with supply chains be a good thing .
    So-called "problems" force people to pay the real market rate. Drivers get to go to whichever "predatory pay rise" (TM Rochdale) gets offered to them, the firms get to move whichever goods companies are prepared to pay enough to get moved - and the freeloaders at the bottom of the pyramid fall out.
    The problem with your argument is that it's not the freeloaders who are falling out.

    Its the greater hassle fuel and coolchain hauliers who have immediate problems because the extra money they pay is now not worth the extra hassle.
    The biggie was when the pay fiesta hit the tanker drivers. I assume that Hoyer et al have responded with their own pay rises so they will recruit drivers back which will fill the gaps. Until the next round of poaching when we go back to shortages again and again.

    Thing is, if you are an ADR driver the country really needs you driving fuel and toxic chemicals, not sofas. "Just pay more" is fine and they will and are. But as you lose and then poach back drivers you have gaps and that means fuel shortages.
    Then maybe don't lose them. Maybe pay them more in the first place and when they hand in their notice, maybe stop and think "oh I'll need to pay even more than this".

    If you keep having pathetically small pay rises under the circumstances then yes that will be a problem. Its a problem you need to fix though not have the state fix it for you.
    38% is "pathetically small"?

    How much should a pay rise be to (a) keep existing drivers and (b) cover any and all possible pay rises by competitors? I've managed a lot of salary budgets and recruited talent where you have to pay to keep them. Never managed a speculative +80% or +180% just in case the rival down the road increases their offer.
    If you haven't filled your vacancies then yes it is.

    The benchmark I'm using is I know truckers in the States can be on over $100k per annum. What did your piddly 38% (34% if we exclude the 2.5% inflation only rise) pay rise in the circumstances increase pay upto out of curiosity?
    "Your piddly 38% pay rise"

    Careful. Your trolling about this is very high grade but you've now become complacent. And this is just to see how much you can get away with. Don't blow it.
    I'm not trolling.

    For months now Rochdale and others have been saying that there's this humongous crisis in the industry with 100,000 extra staff needed. The refrain time and again was pay more to get the vacancies paid.

    I for one did not mean a 38% pay rise as being the limit for that. Yes if it means a 100% pay rise or more to fill the vacancies then JFDI applies.

    If you want to increase the pool of drivers by 33% then I see no reason why they must be paid less than MPs for instance.
    Time for some back of the envelope maths.

    Give 300k truck drivers £40k salary increases is an extra £12bn filtering through to costs for UK plc. Over £400 per household.

    And that is just one industry, there will be other wage rises we have to fund too, we have tax increases, energy increases as well.

    Something is going to break, and it will be government promises around controlling migration.
    I am not at all sure where your 300k truck drivers are to receive an additional £40K pa to their existing salary

    They have seen increases but not of that magnitude

    Or am I missing something
    It is PT's "unusual" solution of increasing pay by 100%, not that of anyone responsible for this in the real world.
    How is that "unusual" if you want to fill 100k vacancies from within this country? Its just supply and demand

    If you don't want to fill 100k vacancies then yes fair enough don't raise prices to the appropriate market rate. But if you do, you charge whatever you need to and pay whatever you need to.

    That's the going rate in the USA. I see no reason it shouldn't be the going rate in this country. Do you?
    In isolation its fine. But there are millions of households who cannot afford £400 extra costs to pay for wage increases in just a single industry, on top of rising costs and taxes elsewhere. If that is the Brexit dividend the government will lose the next election. They don't want to so will allow much more migration than many Brexit voters want, but try and pretend it is temporary and less than it is.
    Wage rises are going up in other sectors too.

    Taxes should be cut and wages rise, besides as wages rise that's more money for the exchequer anyway.
    The first generation to not live through the downsides of high inflation are starting to come through. It will not be the happy place you think it is. There will be winners, sure, but losers too, and losers blame politicians more than winners give them credit.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,071
    This is an unbelievably huge change

    https://twitter.com/cflav/status/1441365314256527360?s=19

    A big chunk of the Florida housing market is based on massively federaply subsidised flood insurance.

  • Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    If its below the minimum wage for MPs then that will say it all, won't it?
    Its a fascinating plan. Set the minimum wage for all jobs to £82k in line with MPs. That it hasn't already been done is a terrible indictment on profiteering bosess.

    "Up the workers!" says Red Phillo.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,182
    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 9,983
    rcs1000 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Shell saying it's bringing forwards deliveries to forecourts. In this weird alternate universe that's apparently impossible and the man from Shell must be lying because the UK has got no tanker drivers.

    I was once on a trip to Qatar to see Shell's giant Pearl gas-to-liquids plant. On the bus from Doha, I found myself sitting next to a really interesting guy, who was one layer down from the main Shell board. He ran the multi-billion pound revenue, Shell UK service and petrol station business. At the end of the ride, we swapped business cards. His read:

    "Manager, Shell Retail (UK)".
    Next time ask Vince Cable for a dance.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,967
    stodge said:

    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.

    It was certainly not mind-numbing tedium when the late and much missed Peter Alliss was commenting on it
  • isamisam Posts: 38,082

    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?
  • Alistair said:

    This is an unbelievably huge change

    https://twitter.com/cflav/status/1441365314256527360?s=19

    A big chunk of the Florida housing market is based on massively federaply subsidised flood insurance.

    Mar-a-Lago?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702
    edited September 24


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupation-codes

    is the rates/occupations
    Seems this is the important bit

    You must meet all of the following requirements to be eligible for a Skilled Worker visa:

    your job is eligible for this visa

    you’ll be working for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office

    you’ll be paid at least the minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing

    The minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing is whichever is the highest out of the following 3 options:

    £25,600 per year
    £10.10 per hour

    the ‘going rate’ for the type of work you’ll be doing
    So if I hire a "Tansport Manager" who needs an HGV license (because Malmesbury Corp is hands-on-management organisation) for £11 an hour......
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 14,723
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:

    Further to this. Am increasingly of the opinion that Xi's internal crackdown and bellicosity is a sign of weakness not strength. The PRC survives on the bargain that folk get ever richer. And the poor can aspire to be rich. This is looking shaky post-Covid.
    Xi's faction is not the only one in the CCP. Not by a long chalk.

    I also suspect as people get richer they want to have more say in their lives, how their money is spent and what they can and can't do. There will come a point when the Chinese economy won't deliver as it has unless it moves into new areas rather than traditional industrialisation.

    China has opted for economic imperialism in Africa - to be fair, the West has not responded in kind or certainly not to the same scale. I suppose one could argue the Chinese are strictly amoral about this - they don't care who is in charge as long as stability is maintained for their economic progress.
    Yes. The electricity shortages are a case in point.
    The wealthy want to live in or near the cities.
    But they are filthy and seriously unhealthy due to industry and coal burning. So they try to address that, with knock-on effects of shortages. Equally, the Ponzi Scheme which is the housing market is wobbling, possibly critically.
    Their answer right now is to try to prevent folk openly moaning. And attempt some Nationalist foreign policy culture war issue.
    But there will come a flashpoint eventually. Especially if the tens of millions of migrant workers either lose their jobs, or are forced to their home Provinces.
    And then it will be Tiananmen 2. Or Xi for the correctional farm.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,124
    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    This is because a question asking for a VI when your VI is irrelevant for the next 2+ years is not in fact about VI. It's about something else. It isn't possible to know what that something else is. What we do know is that hypothetical questions are tough for people. The genius of John Curtice is that every 5 years he is properly funded to ask people what they are actually doing on polling day, and he gets it right. It's the only time this is possible. Daily polling sets a daily share price in a share that is only tradable once every four or five years; so immediate emotion enters into it.

    it's perfectly possible that the Labour lead wasn't an outlier, but was just a momentary spasm of emotion. We can't really ever know.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 4,615
    If you look at the average poll graph from Wikipedia you can see that the Tories are rocky back to where they were at the beginning of the year, before the vaccine bounce, but Labour have recovered much less of the ground they have lost since then.

    The Lib Dems are back.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,489

    Cases in England up 5k again today. I think thats 6 days running.

    Meanwhile:

    Hospital numbers in…

    That’s a trend like to see. Almost below 5000 in hospital now.



    https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1441422590132768770?s=20

    If it's youngsters getting infected, and they're not passing it on to oldies....hospital rates will continue to fall - and in a largely vaccinated population, the hospitalisation rate is what we should be paying attention to.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702

    Cases in England up 5k again today. I think thats 6 days running.

    Meanwhile:

    Hospital numbers in…

    That’s a trend like to see. Almost below 5000 in hospital now.



    https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1441422590132768770?s=20

    If it's youngsters getting infected, and they're not passing it on to oldies....hospital rates will continue to fall - and in a largely vaccinated population, the hospitalisation rate is what we should be paying attention to.
    Yes -- running the numbers now. Few issues with the feed.

    But what we have been seeing for a while now is a fall in cases in the vaccinated and rise in the unvaccinated.

    image
  • HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.

    It was certainly not mind-numbing tedium when the late and much missed Peter Alliss was commenting on it
    It is not if you play golf, but many non golfers will find it tedious

  • Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupation-codes

    is the rates/occupations
    Seems this is the important bit

    You must meet all of the following requirements to be eligible for a Skilled Worker visa:

    your job is eligible for this visa

    you’ll be working for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office

    you’ll be paid at least the minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing

    The minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing is whichever is the highest out of the following 3 options:

    £25,600 per year
    £10.10 per hour

    the ‘going rate’ for the type of work you’ll be doing
    So if I hire a "Tansport Manager" who needs an HGV license (because Malmesbury Corp is hands-on-management organisation) for £11 an hour......
    On a 35 hour week that is below £25,600 if my maths are correct
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 88,967

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.

    It was certainly not mind-numbing tedium when the late and much missed Peter Alliss was commenting on it
    It is not if you play golf, but many non golfers will find it tedious
    Alliss though was such a good commentator that people used to tune in just for his commentary, even if they had little interest in golf.

    A bit like Brian Johnston or Henry Blofeld for the cricket
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702


    Now they look like compounding that decision by caving in and allowing people to avoid paying the market rate for jobs to be done.

    Depends on how they set the minimum wage for HGV drivers.
    I was under the impression there is a wage floor which had to be applied to all grants of visa

    I leave that out there to those in the know
    From the quoted gov site in the last thread it was 80% of the average wage in the market, IIRC
    Thanks
    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupations/skilled-worker-visa-going-rates-for-eligible-occupation-codes

    is the rates/occupations
    Seems this is the important bit

    You must meet all of the following requirements to be eligible for a Skilled Worker visa:

    your job is eligible for this visa

    you’ll be working for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office

    you’ll be paid at least the minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing

    The minimum salary for the type of work you’ll be doing is whichever is the highest out of the following 3 options:

    £25,600 per year
    £10.10 per hour

    the ‘going rate’ for the type of work you’ll be doing
    So if I hire a "Tansport Manager" who needs an HGV license (because Malmesbury Corp is hands-on-management organisation) for £11 an hour......
    On a 35 hour week that is below £25,600 if my maths are correct
    Well kick it up too whatever is 25,601...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 4,615

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
    So how does a government solve housing costs without ensuring they lose the next election?
    *Just pay people more*

    If for a few years wages rise by 9%, CPI prices by 5% and house prices by 1% then within five years there'd have been a 31% real term reduction in house price to earnings ratios - but nobody would have gone into negative equity.

    We need wage inflation. Oh and it'd deflate debt to GDP and it'd boost the Exchequer via fiscal drag.
    Sounds great, but essentially it boils down to - we need to become richer and not spend all our increased wealth on housing.

    Looking back at the last few decades both of those outcomes look a trifle unlikely.

    I can just about believe that we might get richer, that, finally, businesses will invest and productivity will increase. It could happen.

    I find it much harder to believe that we wouldn't funnel most of this increased wealth into housing.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    stodge said:

    MaxPB said:

    Shell saying it's bringing forwards deliveries to forecourts. In this weird alternate universe that's apparently impossible and the man from Shell must be lying because the UK has got no tanker drivers.

    Britain also has no petrol shortages so that is another reason Shell must be lying. :wink:
    The trouble is, once the panic starts, the fuel deliveries can't keep pace with the demand. The supply from each tanker is used up more quickly.

    I remember my mother queuing for three gallons of petrol (rationed) in 1974 and my father earnestly predicting there would be riots if petrol went above £1 a gallon.

    Strangely, twenty one years on from the 2000 crisis, we still incredibly dependent on and vulnerable to any interruption to petrol supplies.
    This is absolutely crucial.

    There are 38 million cars in the UK. If we assume they all have 15 gallon petrol tanks, and that at any time they are normally 60% filled, that means there are 342 million gallons of petrol sitting in peoples' cars normally.

    Now, if people panic about petrol availability, and everyone wants their car filled to (on average) 80% capacity to deal with the risk of shortages, then you need to find 114 million gallons of petrol.

    That is about three million barrels of oil. (Indeed, that's based on the rather lazy assumption that there's a 0.8:1 ratio of petrol to crude oil, and the real number is probably less.)

    Three million barrels of oil is a lot of oil.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 51,489
    edited September 24
    You know. I've got to be honest. I'm starting to have my doubts as to how accurate that 7,000 hospitalisations per day forecast is going to prove.
    https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1441427927728418816?s=20

    Bring in measures soon or risk 7,000 daily Covid hospitalisations, Sage warns

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/14/bring-in-measures-soon-or-risk-7000-daily-covid-cases-sage-warns
  • isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720

    Cases in England up 5k again today. I think thats 6 days running.

    Meanwhile:

    Hospital numbers in…

    That’s a trend like to see. Almost below 5000 in hospital now.



    https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1441422590132768770?s=20

    If it's youngsters getting infected, and they're not passing it on to oldies....hospital rates will continue to fall - and in a largely vaccinated population, the hospitalisation rate is what we should be paying attention to.
    I'm sorry, but @Chris told me very emphatically that case-to-hospitalization rates had not dropped.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,532
    edited September 24

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.

    It was certainly not mind-numbing tedium when the late and much missed Peter Alliss was commenting on it
    It is not if you play golf, but many non golfers will find it tedious
    Never had to play a shot anything like Spieths! Straight up a vertical bank from thick rough, and then avoid falling into the lake!
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,379
    edited September 24
    The Arizona “audit” coming out tomorrow didn’t just confirm Biden won. Biden actually gained votes in their recount, while Trump lost hundreds, according to a draft report. 2.1M VOTES RECOUNTED

    https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/1441233874340646919/photo/1
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 30,984



    *Just pay people more*

    If for a few years wages rise by 9%, CPI prices by 5% and house prices by 1% then within five years there'd have been a 31% real term reduction in house price to earnings ratios - but nobody would have gone into negative equity.

    We need wage inflation. Oh and it'd deflate debt to GDP and it'd boost the Exchequer via fiscal drag.

    That does imply a gigantic increase in purchasing power if wages are rising by 9% and inflation by just 5%. Any export industries would find life very difficult and I expect our savings rate would crater at 5% CPI.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 10,198
    edited September 24
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    I forgot it's that mind-numbing tedium known as the Ryder Cup when every putt is the most significant in the history of golf.

    Fortunately, BENBATL broke the mile track record at Newmarket winning the Joel this afternoon - that's a performance we can all appreciate.

    It was certainly not mind-numbing tedium when the late and much missed Peter Alliss was commenting on it
    It is not if you play golf, but many non golfers will find it tedious
    Alliss though was such a good commentator that people used to tune in just for his commentary, even if they had little interest in golf.

    A bit like Brian Johnston or Henry Blofeld for the cricket
    As someone who used to bet on golf, I'd say at least TMS gave you some idea of what was happening out in the middle. Sometimes I was not even sure Allis himself knew. Tbf I think part of the reason golf-betting was easier then was the deplorable coverage that ignored the leaderboard to concentrate on Nick Faldo and a few other big names.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,082
    edited September 24

    isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
    Yeah I reckon so too. Reduced Labour majorities in a few safe seats, but no real damage. Someone on here produced a list of seats where a drift from Lab to Green could let the Tories in, but cant be many.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,809

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    To think, when I used to say mass immigration of cheap EU Labour suppressed wages, people on here actually used to argue that it didn't

    The Supply-and-Demand deniers

    I don't believe it can have a significant impact in a highly globalized world. If British firms are paying more for the same skills, then either their profit margins will need to shrink, the pound will need to fall to compensate, or they will choose to hire overseas.

    Having actually done a lot of hiring, I have never found that developers in London were particularly cheaper than in other locations (indeed, they were almost certainly a bit more expensive), but that was made up by having such a deep pool of talent to choose from. One could get three or four good guys in Estonia at a significant discount to London, but the labour pool was shallow. Attempt to hire fifty people and you rapidly ran up against capacity constraints.

    And, indeed, the statistics largely back this up. Median incomes in the UK have done rather better than the US and a little worse than Germany.

    Where I do think there has been a significant impact has been on the quality of life of those on lower incomes, in particular driven by rising housing costs. A couple on 70% of average London incomes is going to be either commuting from afar (not cheap, terrible impact on family life), or will struggle to ever get onto the housing ladder - and having the resources to have their own place and raise children, will be extremely challenging. The issue goes beyond housing, too. It includes overcrowded transport, schools and GPs offices. Simply, a lot of people were looking to access the same range of services, at the same time that an ageing population removed funding from a lot of these.
    So how does a government solve housing costs without ensuring they lose the next election?
    *Just pay people more*

    If for a few years wages rise by 9%, CPI prices by 5% and house prices by 1% then within five years there'd have been a 31% real term reduction in house price to earnings ratios - but nobody would have gone into negative equity.

    We need wage inflation. Oh and it'd deflate debt to GDP and it'd boost the Exchequer via fiscal drag.
    Sounds great, but essentially it boils down to - we need to become richer and not spend all our increased wealth on housing.

    Looking back at the last few decades both of those outcomes look a trifle unlikely.

    I can just about believe that we might get richer, that, finally, businesses will invest and productivity will increase. It could happen.

    I find it much harder to believe that we wouldn't funnel most of this increased wealth into housing.
    Oh we would, the simple fact is that house prices are set by the person willing to borrow the most for that property (and that's often a financially illiterate BTLer with some spare cash from his pension lump sum).

    I can't see any way of resolving that issue (as banks will lend whatever they can given the fact they have virtually unlimited access to cash) beyond an additional tax on the owner of property. Which is one reason why I want a Land value / wealth tax based on a low percentage 0.25% say of current house prices.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 18,702

    The big reason why pollsters should publish outlier polls is that it proves they're running an honest shop. Every poll has a margin of error, but remember that the margin of error (as traditionally reported) covers only 95% of all results. There is going to be that one out of 20 times when a result falls outside the margin of error.....

    When a pollster continuously produces results close to the average, it means something funky is going on. It could mean a pollster is not reporting outlier polls or somehow weighting their polls to match the average. That's bad science. Pollsters must and should have faith in their methods


    https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/28/politics/outlier-polls-analysis/index.html

    This. When I was doing Biology A level, there was a brilliant trick experiment. If you recorded the values the experiment actually produced, you would get some stuff which didn't match the theory you'd been taught to that point. So about half the class "smoothed" the data points away. Then the teacher explained about data quality and reporting.
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 2,076
    isam said:

    isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
    Yeah I reckon so too. Reduced Labour majorities in a few safe seats, but no real damage. Someone pn here produced a list of seats where a drift from Lab to Green could let the Tories in, but cant be many.
    The point is we are mid term and labour are on 32-35%.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720
    MaxPB said:



    *Just pay people more*

    If for a few years wages rise by 9%, CPI prices by 5% and house prices by 1% then within five years there'd have been a 31% real term reduction in house price to earnings ratios - but nobody would have gone into negative equity.

    We need wage inflation. Oh and it'd deflate debt to GDP and it'd boost the Exchequer via fiscal drag.

    That does imply a gigantic increase in purchasing power if wages are rising by 9% and inflation by just 5%. Any export industries would find life very difficult and I expect our savings rate would crater at 5% CPI.
    My view is that it is easier to improve *real* wages by lowering the cost of living, and specifically the cost of housing. This will have the biggest impact on the low paid, for whom housing takes up a disproportionate share of their income. This can be done in a number of ways - from encouraging building, and to tax the owners of property over the occupiers. (And I would charge more for people who leave flats and houses unoccupied.) I'd also cut stamp duty to zero for first time buyers and for those trading down.

    Next I would move to aggressively open up food to imports from abroad, for exactly the same reasons. Someone earning £60,000/year spends doesn't spend 4x the amount on food, someone earning £15,000/year does.

    Finally, I would unify NI and income tax, and work to remove all those silly kinks where removal of benefits result in 100% marginal tax rates.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 40,720

    isam said:

    isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
    Yeah I reckon so too. Reduced Labour majorities in a few safe seats, but no real damage. Someone pn here produced a list of seats where a drift from Lab to Green could let the Tories in, but cant be many.
    The point is we are mid term and labour are on 32-35%.
    If you believe the next election will be in 2023, then we're practically in the last 18 months.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,832
    And suddenly there are reports that less people are applying to work in the UK.

    One recruiter claimed they had received five times fewer applications for driver jobs since the vote for Brexit.
    https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/1441431622100815879/photo/1
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,907

    Odd that, an opinion poll out on its own, and fitting the hopes of a well known poster (financial gain AND his favorite party), proving to be an outlier? Who'd have thought it? We never learn.

    Odd that, an opinion poll out on its own, and fitting the hopes of a well known poster (financial gain AND his favorite party), proving to be an outlier? Who'd have thought it? We never learn.

    Bollocks mate. LAB is NOT my favourite party and this site is about betting.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,082

    isam said:

    isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
    Yeah I reckon so too. Reduced Labour majorities in a few safe seats, but no real damage. Someone pn here produced a list of seats where a drift from Lab to Green could let the Tories in, but cant be many.
    The point is we are mid term and labour are on 32-35%.
    Appalling for them, in my opinion. Mid term, half a dozen points behind the govt with an uncharismatic leader who is thought of as weak, and trailing the incumbent on all but one firms leader net ratings, and all of them on Gross Positives. I cant see any logical reason why the Tories wont win a majority again
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,379

    Odd that, an opinion poll out on its own, and fitting the hopes of a well known poster (financial gain AND his favorite party), proving to be an outlier? Who'd have thought it? We never learn.

    Odd that, an opinion poll out on its own, and fitting the hopes of a well known poster (financial gain AND his favorite party), proving to be an outlier? Who'd have thought it? We never learn.

    Bollocks mate. LAB is NOT my favourite party and this site is about betting.
    Think he is referring to CHB Mike not you
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 1,009
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    isam said:


    eek said:

    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.

    The Tory vote is very slowly going down. Labour's problem is that it is not benefiting.

    I suspect it's benefiting, it's just that at the same time some tentative Labour support is shifting to the Lib Dems and Greens.
    That was what Yougov's latest poll suggested: SKS's "after you Boris" approach is winning back support but shedding voters on the other side.

    Of those 2019 Labour voters who gave us a party vote intention (i.e. excluding those who will not vote or are currently unsure), 78% said they would stick with Labour. At this point 11% would vote Green instead, 4% would now vote Conservative, and another 4% would vote Liberal Democrat. A mere 1% would switch to Reform UK. This suggests that Labour face their biggest thread from the left – specifically the Greens – when it comes to shoring up their voter base from the last election.
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/09/23/labour-are-struggling-make-big-inroads-voters-are-

    I would expect a decent chunk of that Green vote to come back.

    What would be your line on under/over Green % at the next GE?

    I reckon they'll end up with around 5%, slightly more than they got in 2019 - and most of the rise will happen in safe Labour seats.
    Yeah I reckon so too. Reduced Labour majorities in a few safe seats, but no real damage. Someone pn here produced a list of seats where a drift from Lab to Green could let the Tories in, but cant be many.
    The point is we are mid term and labour are on 32-35%.
    If you believe the next election will be in 2023, then we're practically in the last 18 months.
    Judging on the last 2 elections, it the last 18 days when all the action happens.
    Then again, in 2015 nothing much happened in the last 4.5 years.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,648
    eek said:

    "That YouGov LAB lead poll is increasingly looking like an outlier"

    Not by tomorrow it won't be.

    What is surprising is how the Tory vote reduces and then within a few days returns to previous heights.

    It seems that 25% of the Tory vote has the memory of a goldfish - they react to a tap on the fish tank's glass and then within a week or so completely forget about the reason why there were annoyed.
    One of the many advantages of having an elderly support perhaps?
Sign In or Register to comment.