Howdy, Stranger!

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

Boris Johnson isn’t under threat – politicalbetting.com

12346»

Comments

  • IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I wonder what it is about hard leftwingers that they wish to change every conversation to being about Jews? 🤔

    Priests abusing children is wrong.
    "Conservative" Muslims abusing women is wrong
    What have Hasidic Jews done to be dragged into the conversation?

    The moral elision is all from you. It isn't impossible that some muslim men force some women to wear burqas against their will, but assuming that to be the case without a shred of evidence is not a great look at all, at all.
    Ridiculous

    Go on Twitter and you will find hundreds of campaigners - Muslim women - fighting against the veil, the niqab and the burqa. Listen to the voices of the Afghan women, terrified of the Taliban- "they will put us in those death shrouds again" (and so they have)

    That you haven't heard these voices is not a great look - for you
    The UK is not Afghanistan. As a rule of thumb, when relatively primitive people, women included, believe religious stuff they really believe it, without the Cof E nonsense about ooo it's all actually a metaphor for something else. I'm happy to believe that UK muslim women wear this stuff because of male bullying rather than it being the will of Allah, but some evidence would be good.
    Some pre-primitive female people in Afghanistan

    I think the argument implied there is, some people are not religious, therefore no one is?
    Some women do seem happy being exploited in male dominated cults.
    You are an unparalleled master of the non sequitur.
    ETA and what is your position on the gender of the people in the photo?
    I respect however they identified.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,170
    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
  • dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    I expect crossover in the next few weeks but it may just be no matter the metrics labour are not seen that they could deal with this energy and supply crisis any better
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,120
    The Czech election is today and after the excitements of the German election a fortnight ago, what can we expect from the good voters of Czechia?

    It looks as though the ruling ANO party of Andrej Babis will top the poll again with about 27% of the vote, a couple of points down on 2017. The centre-right SPOLU electoral pact will come in with 20-22% which is about what the component parties got last time, The Pirates & Mayors pact is also set to get about what they got last time (16-17%).Both the Freedom & Direct Democracy party and Prisaha look set to get above the 5% threshold - the Communists might make it, the Social Democrats almost certainly won't.

    The problem for Babis is neither SPOLU nor the Pirates seem willing to work with him and he won't be as convincing a winner as he was last time. Whether the other groups can sink their differences and form an anti-ANO government remains to be seen.

    In Germany, I detect tentative signs the SPD-Green-FDP coalition government might yet happen and the mood within the Union seems to go into opposition which might be politically astute.
  • dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    Covid is far more the issue than Brexit
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    And one huge problem is Saudi is training Imams, funding them, and offering them for free to impoverished parts of the Muslim world.
    They bring with them their extreme views of Wah'habism into societies which have never previously interpreted Islam in any such way.
    But we love the Saudis for obvious reasons.

    There has been conservative Islam across the whole Muslim world long before the House of Saud got its oil money. The reality is that, according to Islam's own texts, the founder of Islam frequently went to war, had his enemies assassinated, gave away female POWs as slaves to his followers, had intimate relations with a pre-teen, and taught that women should have fewer rights than men under the law. People love to compare this to the worse bits of the Bible. But Islam has no message of radical inclusion of outsiders, separation of the divine from the secular power, or elevation of pacifism. All of these are central to Christianity.
    Sure there has.
    But the Saudis seem bent on, and have the wherewithal to make it the dominant strain.
    While we roar them on from the sidelines.
    I don't have the knowledge to challenge your rosy view of Christianity, but, having been brought up a strict Catholic, I don't fully recognise the first two of your messages as especially central.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,577
    This is incredibly stupid logic by David Gauke:
    The government initially sought to deal with this issue defensively by making the points listed above. The arguments were thin but might have been enough to muddle through a few days of disruption, yet the Prime Minister took a different tack: a shortage of HGV drivers will be addressed by paying HGV drivers more because they will no longer be undercut by EU workers; that this is a benefit of Brexit; and this was part of the plan all along. The transition might be a little painful but we will end up with higher-paid HGV drivers and, for that matter, social care workers, fruit-pickers, construction workers and catering staff. We will move from being a low-skill, low-paid economy reliant on immigration to a high-skilled, high-paid economy based on UK citizens having more opportunities, he argues.

    The economics of this are nonsense. If we pay people more without improving productivity, the costs are just passed on to consumers. The argument that the route to greater prosperity is by just paying ourselves more might have been used by 1970s trade union leaders but it is a curious one when deployed by a Conservative Prime Minister. An analogy can also be made with trade protectionism – tariffs might boost the pay of some workers but those workers are also consumers and they will face higher costs too.
    The cost of labour is only a fraction of the cost of products, and low wage domestic labour is a fraction of that. So the "higher costs" they face are far smaller than the higher wages they receive.

    Is the quality of our MPs really so poor that they can't get beyond qualitative arguments to think of the numbers involved? Or does Gauke know this but is just parroting stupid arguments in the name of finding any "BREXIT BAD" argument he can?

  • pingping Posts: 2,143
    edited October 2021
    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,577
    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,577
    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    While that maybe true, house price inflation doesn't have much correlation with the expansion of the money supply. It is mainly a supply and demand driven thing.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,120
    IshmaelZ said:


    Ship powered by LNG it says here, hope they bought forward.

    In a 14-day cruise, we had one refuelling (Barcelona I think) and of course they were re-fuelling today at Southampton. It's an obvious concern not just for P&O but for all the big cruise operators. Anthem of the Seas ( one of the Royal Caribbean megaships) was also in Southampton today.

    I suspect our trip was a loss leader at 60% capacity - they closed a couple of the restaurants. The demographic was primarily British and elderly but the bars were busy. It's amazing however how many ports have frantically constructed new deepwater channels and cruise terminals to accommodate the megaships. Malaga and Alicante were two new stops - both areas had clearly spent plenty of money.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 22,658
    Just seen Bond. Not as terrible as I was expecting, but glad to see the back of Craig. Hopefully the next incarnation is back to making decent standalone movies.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    edited October 2021
    stodge said:

    The Czech election is today and after the excitements of the German election a fortnight ago, what can we expect from the good voters of Czechia?

    It looks as though the ruling ANO party of Andrej Babis will top the poll again with about 27% of the vote, a couple of points down on 2017. The centre-right SPOLU electoral pact will come in with 20-22% which is about what the component parties got last time, The Pirates & Mayors pact is also set to get about what they got last time (16-17%).Both the Freedom & Direct Democracy party and Prisaha look set to get above the 5% threshold - the Communists might make it, the Social Democrats almost certainly won't.

    The problem for Babis is neither SPOLU nor the Pirates seem willing to work with him and he won't be as convincing a winner as he was last time. Whether the other groups can sink their differences and form an anti-ANO government remains to be seen.

    In Germany, I detect tentative signs the SPD-Green-FDP coalition government might yet happen and the mood within the Union seems to go into opposition which might be politically astute.

    There is a poll conducted today, so I assume the exit poll, showing ANO in third place.
    There has been a poll embargo, so maybe the Panama revelations have done for Babis in the final week?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    And one huge problem is Saudi is training Imams, funding them, and offering them for free to impoverished parts of the Muslim world.
    They bring with them their extreme views of Wah'habism into societies which have never previously interpreted Islam in any such way.
    But we love the Saudis for obvious reasons.

    There has been conservative Islam across the whole Muslim world long before the House of Saud got its oil money. The reality is that, according to Islam's own texts, the founder of Islam frequently went to war, had his enemies assassinated, gave away female POWs as slaves to his followers, had intimate relations with a pre-teen, and taught that women should have fewer rights than men under the law. People love to compare this to the worse bits of the Bible. But Islam has no message of radical inclusion of outsiders, separation of the divine from the secular power, or elevation of pacifism. All of these are central to Christianity.
    Sure there has.
    But the Saudis seem bent on, and have the wherewithal to make it the dominant strain.
    While we roar them on from the sidelines.
    I don't have the knowledge to challenge your rosy view of Christianity, but, having been brought up a strict Catholic, I don't fully recognise the first two of your messages as especially central.
    Good Samaritan, Render unto Caesar...
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254
    Scotland V Israel 5pm (live on Sky)

    Scotland 1.85
    Draw 3.7
    Israel 5.2

    (via Betfair)

    I was planning on posting this info without comment but I've got to say the value is in a non-scotland bet.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    stodge said:

    IshmaelZ said:


    Ship powered by LNG it says here, hope they bought forward.

    In a 14-day cruise, we had one refuelling (Barcelona I think) and of course they were re-fuelling today at Southampton. It's an obvious concern not just for P&O but for all the big cruise operators. Anthem of the Seas ( one of the Royal Caribbean megaships) was also in Southampton today.

    I suspect our trip was a loss leader at 60% capacity - they closed a couple of the restaurants. The demographic was primarily British and elderly but the bars were busy. It's amazing however how many ports have frantically constructed new deepwater channels and cruise terminals to accommodate the megaships. Malaga and Alicante were two new stops - both areas had clearly spent plenty of money.
    AotS appears to burn diesel not gas.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    Yes but. House price inflation is great for owners of homes.
    General price inflation is bad for everyone. Apart from those with huge debts.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,207
    Aslan said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    While that maybe true, house price inflation doesn't have much correlation with the expansion of the money supply. It is mainly a supply and demand driven thing.
    Is that so? Here's JC Williams (look him up) on the matter.
     
    In summary, I draw two main conclusions from a large volume of research on the effects of monetary policy on house prices. Both are robust across countries, samples, methodologies and other factors. First, monetary policy actions have sizeable and significant effects on house prices in advanced economies. That is, an increase in interest rates tends to lower real (inflation-adjusted) house prices. Second, this reduction in house prices comes at significant costs in terms of reductions in real gross domestic product and inflation. A typical estimate is that a 1% loss in GDP is associated with a 4% reduction in house prices. This implies a very costly trade-off of using monetary policy to affect house prices when macroeconomic and financial stability goals are in conflict.
     
    https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap88_keynote.pdf
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    edited October 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    And one huge problem is Saudi is training Imams, funding them, and offering them for free to impoverished parts of the Muslim world.
    They bring with them their extreme views of Wah'habism into societies which have never previously interpreted Islam in any such way.
    But we love the Saudis for obvious reasons.

    There has been conservative Islam across the whole Muslim world long before the House of Saud got its oil money. The reality is that, according to Islam's own texts, the founder of Islam frequently went to war, had his enemies assassinated, gave away female POWs as slaves to his followers, had intimate relations with a pre-teen, and taught that women should have fewer rights than men under the law. People love to compare this to the worse bits of the Bible. But Islam has no message of radical inclusion of outsiders, separation of the divine from the secular power, or elevation of pacifism. All of these are central to Christianity.
    Sure there has.
    But the Saudis seem bent on, and have the wherewithal to make it the dominant strain.
    While we roar them on from the sidelines.
    I don't have the knowledge to challenge your rosy view of Christianity, but, having been brought up a strict Catholic, I don't fully recognise the first two of your messages as especially central.
    Good Samaritan, Render unto Caesar...
    Well yes. But the Catholic Church wasn't particularly all "radical inclusion of non-Catholics", nor preaching the equality of the opinions of the government of the day with the doctrine.
    Not as I recall anyways.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 18,739
    Presumably we'll get a clutch of post conference season polls tonight?
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,204
    edited October 2021
    dixiedean said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    Yes but. House price inflation is great for owners of homes.
    General price inflation is bad for everyone. Apart from those with huge debts.
    And only for them if they can afford the interest payments. Otherwise it's bankruptcy.

    Edit: Huge debts, fixed interest and high inflation works for the debtor though.
  • dixiedean said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    Yes but. House price inflation is great for owners of homes.
    General price inflation is bad for everyone. Apart from those with huge debts.
    Or those of us wise enough to have bought 5 years worth of bog roll at March 2020 prices.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,120
    dixiedean said:


    There is a poll conducted today, so I assume the exit poll, showing ANO in third place.
    There has been a poll embargo, so maybe the Panama revelations have done for Babis in the final week?

    The article suggests the Charles University poll is an "experiment" but there seem to be some actual results here:

    https://www.novinky.cz/p/vysledky-voleb/2021/parlamentni-volby

    If these are anywhere near accurate, it's a poor result for the STAN group (Pirates & Mayors) but a stronger effort from SPOLU who will be close behind Babis and ANO2011. The seat projections are 74 for ANO, 68 for SPOLU and 36 for the Pirates with 22 for the Freedom & Direct Democracy group.

    It's a 200-seat Parliament so 101 needed for a majority so SPOLU-Pirates would just get over the line.

    To stress, I'm not sure if these are official results or projections as it's only 5pm in Prague.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 13,164
    edited October 2021
    dixiedean said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    Yes but. House price inflation is great for owners of homes.
    General price inflation is bad for everyone. Apart from those with huge debts.
    Huge debts typically being big mortgages. Win-win if you time it right.
  • dixiedean said:

    Aslan said:

    dixiedean said:

    And one huge problem is Saudi is training Imams, funding them, and offering them for free to impoverished parts of the Muslim world.
    They bring with them their extreme views of Wah'habism into societies which have never previously interpreted Islam in any such way.
    But we love the Saudis for obvious reasons.

    There has been conservative Islam across the whole Muslim world long before the House of Saud got its oil money. The reality is that, according to Islam's own texts, the founder of Islam frequently went to war, had his enemies assassinated, gave away female POWs as slaves to his followers, had intimate relations with a pre-teen, and taught that women should have fewer rights than men under the law. People love to compare this to the worse bits of the Bible. But Islam has no message of radical inclusion of outsiders, separation of the divine from the secular power, or elevation of pacifism. All of these are central to Christianity.
    Sure there has.
    But the Saudis seem bent on, and have the wherewithal to make it the dominant strain.
    While we roar them on from the sidelines.
    I don't have the knowledge to challenge your rosy view of Christianity, but, having been brought up a strict Catholic, I don't fully recognise the first two of your messages as especially central.
    Let's not overlook the stupidity of the IMF and World Bank imposing spending cuts on Pakistan and clearing the path for Saudi-financed madrassas.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    There is a poll conducted today, so I assume the exit poll, showing ANO in third place.
    There has been a poll embargo, so maybe the Panama revelations have done for Babis in the final week?

    The article suggests the Charles University poll is an "experiment" but there seem to be some actual results here:

    https://www.novinky.cz/p/vysledky-voleb/2021/parlamentni-volby

    If these are anywhere near accurate, it's a poor result for the STAN group (Pirates & Mayors) but a stronger effort from SPOLU who will be close behind Babis and ANO2011. The seat projections are 74 for ANO, 68 for SPOLU and 36 for the Pirates with 22 for the Freedom & Direct Democracy group.

    It's a 200-seat Parliament so 101 needed for a majority so SPOLU-Pirates would just get over the line.

    To stress, I'm not sure if these are official results or projections as it's only 5pm in Prague.
    Cheers. Polls closed at 1pm our time. Voting was yesterday and this morning. So they may be results by now.
    I think it is safe to say the "experiment" wasn't an unqualified success!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 58,409
    Mr. 86, not a big cinema-goer, but one film with the plank of wood was enough.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,120
    dixiedean said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    There is a poll conducted today, so I assume the exit poll, showing ANO in third place.
    There has been a poll embargo, so maybe the Panama revelations have done for Babis in the final week?

    The article suggests the Charles University poll is an "experiment" but there seem to be some actual results here:

    https://www.novinky.cz/p/vysledky-voleb/2021/parlamentni-volby

    If these are anywhere near accurate, it's a poor result for the STAN group (Pirates & Mayors) but a stronger effort from SPOLU who will be close behind Babis and ANO2011. The seat projections are 74 for ANO, 68 for SPOLU and 36 for the Pirates with 22 for the Freedom & Direct Democracy group.

    It's a 200-seat Parliament so 101 needed for a majority so SPOLU-Pirates would just get over the line.

    To stress, I'm not sure if these are official results or projections as it's only 5pm in Prague.
    Cheers. Polls closed at 1pm our time. Voting was yesterday and this morning. So they may be results by now.
    I think it is safe to say the "experiment" wasn't an unqualified success!
    That explains quite a bit - the current numbers are ANO 72, SPOLU 69, STAN 37 and Freedom & Direct Democracy 22.

    I think Babis is in trouble here - he's made a lot of enemies and has publicly said he won't deal with Freedom & Direct Democracy or SPOLU. Could the Pirates back him - they look to be the kingmakers and it's the final humiliation for both the Communists and Social Democrats.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I wonder what it is about hard leftwingers that they wish to change every conversation to being about Jews? 🤔

    Priests abusing children is wrong.
    "Conservative" Muslims abusing women is wrong
    What have Hasidic Jews done to be dragged into the conversation?

    The moral elision is all from you. It isn't impossible that some muslim men force some women to wear burqas against their will, but assuming that to be the case without a shred of evidence is not a great look at all, at all.
    Ridiculous

    Go on Twitter and you will find hundreds of campaigners - Muslim women - fighting against the veil, the niqab and the burqa. Listen to the voices of the Afghan women, terrified of the Taliban- "they will put us in those death shrouds again" (and so they have)

    That you haven't heard these voices is not a great look - for you
    The UK is not Afghanistan. As a rule of thumb, when relatively primitive people, women included, believe religious stuff they really believe it, without the Cof E nonsense about ooo it's all actually a metaphor for something else. I'm happy to believe that UK muslim women wear this stuff because of male bullying rather than it being the will of Allah, but some evidence would be good.
    Some pre-primitive female people in Afghanistan

    I think the argument implied there is, some people are not religious, therefore no one is?
    Some women do seem happy being exploited in male dominated cults.
    You are an unparalleled master of the non sequitur.
    ETA and what is your position on the gender of the people in the photo?
    I respect however they identified.
    Oh FFS, what a twattish comment.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 47,939

    Mr. 86, not a big cinema-goer, but one film with the plank of wood was enough.

    Why? Are you not a big Tommy Cooper fan?
  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254
    kinabalu said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I wonder what it is about hard leftwingers that they wish to change every conversation to being about Jews? 🤔

    Priests abusing children is wrong.
    "Conservative" Muslims abusing women is wrong
    What have Hasidic Jews done to be dragged into the conversation?

    The moral elision is all from you. It isn't impossible that some muslim men force some women to wear burqas against their will, but assuming that to be the case without a shred of evidence is not a great look at all, at all.
    The entire point of the burqa is to segregate and dehumanise women. There is nothing acceptable or liberal about it.

    Whether women are forced to wear it against their will because of the threat of [very real] violence, or they wear it voluntarily because their spirits are broken, neither is acceptable.

    If you think me standing up for women is not a good look for me, then I think that looks bad on you. You're no better than HYUFD defending the Catholic Church regarding paedophilia.

    Just because misogyny or paedophilia is cultural or institutionally religious doesn't make it any more acceptable than if its some random person doing that.
    It's worrying how hard you are increasingly pushing the boundaries outside normal licensing hours. Don't equate me with an apologist for paedophilia, please, and don't backhandedly involve other posters in the accusation either.
    You got involved with the conversation choosing to denigrate concerns over misogyny.

    Just as a few days earlier HYUFD was denigrating the concerns over paedophilia.

    The common denominator is excusing because of "religion" that which you would never normally excuse.

    Misogyny is repugnant. The burqa is misogynistic, pure and simple. Anyone not prepared to stand up for women should be utterly ashamed of themselves.
    Philip, this convo illustrates why you grate sometimes. Or with me anyway, I won't speak for others. And I do only mean sometimes. I stress that.

    But ok, so here: You frame your dislike of the Burqa in incredibly lurid terms. It's "evil". It's an absolute abomination. It's oppressive primitive misogyny writ large and nothing but. This has 2 effects:

    (1) It strips all nuance from an issue that has plenty.
    (2) It parades your virtue as being massively feminist and against mumbo jumbo religion.

    Where the suspicion is that (2) is the aim and (1) is the price.

    Then not content with this, having set the Burqa up as a "misogynistic evil", you use it as a platform to parade yet more virtue, this time your "libertarian" creds, pointing out that despite this dreadful dreadful thing being a pure undiluted evil of oppressive misogyny you would NOT ban it cos that would be against your principles.

    See what I mean? The whole thing smacks of shallow, self-regrading, bombastic phoniness.

    To be fair the burqa *is* evil.

    Normal People: Okay we're going to tolerate all religions
    Islam: Okay we think women should be hidden from all view.
    Normal People: Oh FFS

    Don't expect a reply from me - I've got a Scotland match to watch
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 39,709
    Aslan said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    While that maybe true, house price inflation doesn't have much correlation with the expansion of the money supply. It is mainly a supply and demand driven thing.
    No it isn’t. It’s mainly driven by the availability of cheap financing, and our openness to foreign criminalsinvestors.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 39,709
    edited October 2021

    dixiedean said:

    ping said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    This isn’t new. Both red and blue governments have been encouraging house price inflation throughout my lifetime.
    Yes but. House price inflation is great for owners of homes.
    General price inflation is bad for everyone. Apart from those with huge debts.
    Or those of us wise enough to have bought 5 years worth of bog roll at March 2020 prices.
    Indeed. I did so well prudently pre-empting the panic buyers that (provided I stay off the curries) I have enough to last well into 2022.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    Interesting job going at the new Shopping Mall @Stuartinromford

    https://akluplaza.co.uk/jobs/imam/
  • I know Russian Embassy tweets are usually reproduced with a flourish of look how ghastly those Russkis are, but I feel they have something resembling a point here.




  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    Aslan said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
    5% can become double digits quite quickly and then we're grappling with a monster. I think there's a risk of forgetting how dangerous inflation can be since it's been a while now since it was in the ring.
  • isam said:

    Interesting job going at the new Shopping Mall @Stuartinromford

    https://akluplaza.co.uk/jobs/imam/

    "Aklu Plaza will host the new brand, HOME Superstore, which will boast the largest range of food and household essentials from across the world to cater all customer needs"

    Think they'll have a kosher stall?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 7,990
    JBriskin3 said:

    kinabalu said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I wonder what it is about hard leftwingers that they wish to change every conversation to being about Jews? 🤔

    Priests abusing children is wrong.
    "Conservative" Muslims abusing women is wrong
    What have Hasidic Jews done to be dragged into the conversation?

    The moral elision is all from you. It isn't impossible that some muslim men force some women to wear burqas against their will, but assuming that to be the case without a shred of evidence is not a great look at all, at all.
    The entire point of the burqa is to segregate and dehumanise women. There is nothing acceptable or liberal about it.

    Whether women are forced to wear it against their will because of the threat of [very real] violence, or they wear it voluntarily because their spirits are broken, neither is acceptable.

    If you think me standing up for women is not a good look for me, then I think that looks bad on you. You're no better than HYUFD defending the Catholic Church regarding paedophilia.

    Just because misogyny or paedophilia is cultural or institutionally religious doesn't make it any more acceptable than if its some random person doing that.
    It's worrying how hard you are increasingly pushing the boundaries outside normal licensing hours. Don't equate me with an apologist for paedophilia, please, and don't backhandedly involve other posters in the accusation either.
    You got involved with the conversation choosing to denigrate concerns over misogyny.

    Just as a few days earlier HYUFD was denigrating the concerns over paedophilia.

    The common denominator is excusing because of "religion" that which you would never normally excuse.

    Misogyny is repugnant. The burqa is misogynistic, pure and simple. Anyone not prepared to stand up for women should be utterly ashamed of themselves.
    Philip, this convo illustrates why you grate sometimes. Or with me anyway, I won't speak for others. And I do only mean sometimes. I stress that.

    But ok, so here: You frame your dislike of the Burqa in incredibly lurid terms. It's "evil". It's an absolute abomination. It's oppressive primitive misogyny writ large and nothing but. This has 2 effects:

    (1) It strips all nuance from an issue that has plenty.
    (2) It parades your virtue as being massively feminist and against mumbo jumbo religion.

    Where the suspicion is that (2) is the aim and (1) is the price.

    Then not content with this, having set the Burqa up as a "misogynistic evil", you use it as a platform to parade yet more virtue, this time your "libertarian" creds, pointing out that despite this dreadful dreadful thing being a pure undiluted evil of oppressive misogyny you would NOT ban it cos that would be against your principles.

    See what I mean? The whole thing smacks of shallow, self-regrading, bombastic phoniness.

    To be fair the burqa *is* evil.

    Normal People: Okay we're going to tolerate all religions
    Islam: Okay we think women should be hidden from all view.
    Normal People: Oh FFS
    And this is _after_ someone has pointed out how inappropriate it is to mischaracterise Muslims in general like this, let alone contrast them with "Normal People".

    I was going to say it was amazing. But sadly it isn't.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,513

    Mr. 86, not a big cinema-goer, but one film with the plank of wood was enough.

    If you must watch only one with him make it Knives Out.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    JBriskin3 said:

    kinabalu said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I wonder what it is about hard leftwingers that they wish to change every conversation to being about Jews? 🤔

    Priests abusing children is wrong.
    "Conservative" Muslims abusing women is wrong
    What have Hasidic Jews done to be dragged into the conversation?

    The moral elision is all from you. It isn't impossible that some muslim men force some women to wear burqas against their will, but assuming that to be the case without a shred of evidence is not a great look at all, at all.
    The entire point of the burqa is to segregate and dehumanise women. There is nothing acceptable or liberal about it.

    Whether women are forced to wear it against their will because of the threat of [very real] violence, or they wear it voluntarily because their spirits are broken, neither is acceptable.

    If you think me standing up for women is not a good look for me, then I think that looks bad on you. You're no better than HYUFD defending the Catholic Church regarding paedophilia.

    Just because misogyny or paedophilia is cultural or institutionally religious doesn't make it any more acceptable than if its some random person doing that.
    It's worrying how hard you are increasingly pushing the boundaries outside normal licensing hours. Don't equate me with an apologist for paedophilia, please, and don't backhandedly involve other posters in the accusation either.
    You got involved with the conversation choosing to denigrate concerns over misogyny.

    Just as a few days earlier HYUFD was denigrating the concerns over paedophilia.

    The common denominator is excusing because of "religion" that which you would never normally excuse.

    Misogyny is repugnant. The burqa is misogynistic, pure and simple. Anyone not prepared to stand up for women should be utterly ashamed of themselves.
    Philip, this convo illustrates why you grate sometimes. Or with me anyway, I won't speak for others. And I do only mean sometimes. I stress that.

    But ok, so here: You frame your dislike of the Burqa in incredibly lurid terms. It's "evil". It's an absolute abomination. It's oppressive primitive misogyny writ large and nothing but. This has 2 effects:

    (1) It strips all nuance from an issue that has plenty.
    (2) It parades your virtue as being massively feminist and against mumbo jumbo religion.

    Where the suspicion is that (2) is the aim and (1) is the price.

    Then not content with this, having set the Burqa up as a "misogynistic evil", you use it as a platform to parade yet more virtue, this time your "libertarian" creds, pointing out that despite this dreadful dreadful thing being a pure undiluted evil of oppressive misogyny you would NOT ban it cos that would be against your principles.

    See what I mean? The whole thing smacks of shallow, self-regrading, bombastic phoniness.
    To be fair the burqa *is* evil.

    Normal People: Okay we're going to tolerate all religions
    Islam: Okay we think women should be hidden from all view.
    Normal People: Oh FFS

    Don't expect a reply from me - I've got a Scotland match to watch
    Is a Scotland match more enjoyable if proceeded by a quick ejaculation of islamaphobia?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 58,409
    Mr. kle4, too late. Saw Casino Royale. And that's apparently his best Bond.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    There is a poll conducted today, so I assume the exit poll, showing ANO in third place.
    There has been a poll embargo, so maybe the Panama revelations have done for Babis in the final week?

    The article suggests the Charles University poll is an "experiment" but there seem to be some actual results here:

    https://www.novinky.cz/p/vysledky-voleb/2021/parlamentni-volby

    If these are anywhere near accurate, it's a poor result for the STAN group (Pirates & Mayors) but a stronger effort from SPOLU who will be close behind Babis and ANO2011. The seat projections are 74 for ANO, 68 for SPOLU and 36 for the Pirates with 22 for the Freedom & Direct Democracy group.

    It's a 200-seat Parliament so 101 needed for a majority so SPOLU-Pirates would just get over the line.

    To stress, I'm not sure if these are official results or projections as it's only 5pm in Prague.
    Cheers. Polls closed at 1pm our time. Voting was yesterday and this morning. So they may be results by now.
    I think it is safe to say the "experiment" wasn't an unqualified success!
    That explains quite a bit - the current numbers are ANO 72, SPOLU 69, STAN 37 and Freedom & Direct Democracy 22.

    I think Babis is in trouble here - he's made a lot of enemies and has publicly said he won't deal with Freedom & Direct Democracy or SPOLU. Could the Pirates back him - they look to be the kingmakers and it's the final humiliation for both the Communists and Social Democrats.
    Yep.The culling from 6 to 4 groupings will help enormously to make a government.
    Btw. Google translate (my Czech isn't what it was!) tells me we are at 94% counted now. The results remain interim as none of the 14 constituencies have formally completed.
    Babis running a long way third in Prague.
  • Mr. kle4, too late. Saw Casino Royale. And that's apparently his best Bond.

    Skyfall is his best Bond.
  • kle4 said:

    Mr. 86, not a big cinema-goer, but one film with the plank of wood was enough.

    If you must watch only one with him make it Knives Out.
    I still can't get over the fact the nurse from Knives Out appears in No Time To Die.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 7,709
    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    It's that sort of sensibly reasoned post that could get you a good name on PB. That is of course the last thing you want!

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
    I like this well-argued view of yours that NOM is as likely as another Con majority. I don't agree with it but I like it. I track you as one of my bellweathers. The first time - if it happens - when you flip and say Con majority should be odds on will be a moment of note.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 74,513
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
    I like this well-argued view of yours that NOM is as likely as another Con majority. I don't agree with it but I like it. I track you as one of my bellweathers. The first time - if it happens - when you flip and say Con majority should be odds on will be a moment of note.
    Be careful everyone, kinabalu might be tracking you!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 39,709
    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 323
    kinabalu said:

    Aslan said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
    5% can become double digits quite quickly and then we're grappling with a monster. I think there's a risk of forgetting how dangerous inflation can be since it's been a while now since it was in the ring.
    Exactly this.

    There may be economic theory arguing for a higher inflation target, but I can't think of any countries that have successfully managed inflation as high as 5% for decades without it getting out of control at some point.

    And I'd suggest that, if you were going to change the inflation target, doing so during a bout of unintended inflation would be precisely the wrong time to do it, as it suggests the government is not in control of the situation.
  • IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    Where are these fuel shortages and gaps on shelves and rising inflation and slowing growth is happening worldwide

    Apparently we have the highest growth in the G7

    It is true that there is a body of opinion that for its own purposes just wants, even wishes, the UK to fail

    Sad really
  • kinabalu said:

    Aslan said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
    5% can become double digits quite quickly and then we're grappling with a monster. I think there's a risk of forgetting how dangerous inflation can be since it's been a while now since it was in the ring.
    The interesting divide is not people forgetting it but people under 40 never having much experience of it in the first place (HPI and asset inflation is different, very much a problem but different as sure this will get highlighted.....)

    It is possible the over 50s have too much fear of inflation and under 40s have too little fear. Long term analysis of investment trends show that people over estimate the future chance and significance of important economic trends that happen when they grew up, so I think it very plausible both those biases are real.
  • IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    Where are these fuel shortages and gaps on shelves and rising inflation and slowing growth is happening worldwide

    Apparently we have the highest growth in the G7

    It is true that there is a body of opinion that for its own purposes just wants, even wishes, the UK to fail

    Sad really
    Are you talking about the government?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 7,709
    IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    How many 'group chief economists' does it take to make the slightest of waves?

  • IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    Where are these fuel shortages and gaps on shelves and rising inflation and slowing growth is happening worldwide

    Apparently we have the highest growth in the G7

    It is true that there is a body of opinion that for its own purposes just wants, even wishes, the UK to fail

    Sad really
    Isn't that because we had the biggest fall in growth?
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,361

    Mr. kle4, too late. Saw Casino Royale. And that's apparently his best Bond.

    Except for this one:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3TxWIrZWw0
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,301

    IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    Where are these fuel shortages and gaps on shelves and rising inflation and slowing growth is happening worldwide

    Apparently we have the highest growth in the G7

    It is true that there is a body of opinion that for its own purposes just wants, even wishes, the UK to fail

    Sad really
    Facts:
    Survey on shortages: https://news.sky.com/story/food-shortages-eight-million-britons-unable-to-buy-essential-food-items-in-last-fortnight-ons-survey-suggests-12429058

    Forecasts:
    UK growth forecast to be highest- or joint-highest in G7: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn02784/

    Opinions:
    (draw your own)
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 5,170
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
    I like this well-argued view of yours that NOM is as likely as another Con majority. I don't agree with it but I like it. I track you as one of my bellweathers. The first time - if it happens - when you flip and say Con majority should be odds on will be a moment of note.
    Very kind comment. The future is pretty uncertain right now. It may look clearer if the government can get through the winter. At the moment it is hard to see a lot of upside for the Tories while the other parties collectively have the insuperable advantage of not being the government.

    Of all the stuff coming our way, I think inflation is top of the pile for the Tories. It's the sort of issue that would make Brexiteers put Brexit down the priority list.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267
    Ratters said:

    kinabalu said:

    Aslan said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
    5% can become double digits quite quickly and then we're grappling with a monster. I think there's a risk of forgetting how dangerous inflation can be since it's been a while now since it was in the ring.
    Exactly this.

    There may be economic theory arguing for a higher inflation target, but I can't think of any countries that have successfully managed inflation as high as 5% for decades without it getting out of control at some point.

    And I'd suggest that, if you were going to change the inflation target, doing so during a bout of unintended inflation would be precisely the wrong time to do it, as it suggests the government is not in control of the situation.
    I think there's an element of what's becoming clear is central to Johnsonism. Where others see dark clouds gathering, I see the opportunity to buy a new anorak.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,536
    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
    I like this well-argued view of yours that NOM is as likely as another Con majority. I don't agree with it but I like it. I track you as one of my bellweathers. The first time - if it happens - when you flip and say Con majority should be odds on will be a moment of note.
    Very kind comment. The future is pretty uncertain right now. It may look clearer if the government can get through the winter. At the moment it is hard to see a lot of upside for the Tories while the other parties collectively have the insuperable advantage of not being the government.

    Of all the stuff coming our way, I think inflation is top of the pile for the Tories. It's the sort of issue that would make Brexiteers put Brexit down the priority list.

    Inflation is a huge issue as it destroys people's wealth.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,267

    kinabalu said:

    Aslan said:

    Ratters said:

    It does worry me that the government seems to be encouraging inflation when it is already predicted to reach up above 5% at its peak next year.

    Inflation is hard to put back in its box once it's been let out. We have had remarkably stable inflation bouncing above and below the 2% target since the Bank of England’s independence. That has anchored people’s expectations and so has a positive feedback cycle.

    The governments rhetoric, or suggestions such as letting inflation run away to 3-5% consistently, would result in very significant risks, most notably to currency depreciation and/or rate rises. My guess is on the latter given the BoE’s mandate is quite narrowly focussed on managing inflation.

    I would put it up there as one of the biggest risks facing the government before the next election.

    There is a mound of academic argument that 5% inflation is a better target than 2%. It is probably the best thing to combat inequality we can do. It also would allow better recovery from recessions, as it gets over downwards price stickiness more easily.
    5% can become double digits quite quickly and then we're grappling with a monster. I think there's a risk of forgetting how dangerous inflation can be since it's been a while now since it was in the ring.
    The interesting divide is not people forgetting it but people under 40 never having much experience of it in the first place (HPI and asset inflation is different, very much a problem but different as sure this will get highlighted.....)

    It is possible the over 50s have too much fear of inflation and under 40s have too little fear. Long term analysis of investment trends show that people over estimate the future chance and significance of important economic trends that happen when they grew up, so I think it very plausible both those biases are real.
    Yes, there could well be some of that. Oddly perhaps, my politics being squarely of the left, I rate raging inflation as a bigger menace than mass unemployment.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,301

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1446123295904993284

    This is surely indicating something very wrong with the Tory vote, all the YouGov metrics look terrible and yet they have Labour doing the worst of any pollster

    Tbf to YouGov, they show Labour worst because they show Green best.
    They don't show any difference in the Tory share.
    However, I'm voting Labour for lower taxes is a sign of the rabbit hole Brexit has taken us down.
    The Tory vote is, I suggest, solid but brittle. It is based on being the only party that supports Brexit, the character of Boris and the unelectability of Labour as a party. This is not stable and could fracture any time, but it is solid looking in the absence of a coherent alternative.

    Once it changes, for example if the mood changes to the thought that Labour can live with Brexit and deal OK with it, and the SKS can run the country as decently as anyone else, and there are no third options, it could change fast.

    Look for example at the moment when the public laugh at Boris not with him. That would be the end.

    Hence my view that a Tory majority and NOM are equal in the betting.
    I like this well-argued view of yours that NOM is as likely as another Con majority. I don't agree with it but I like it. I track you as one of my bellweathers. The first time - if it happens - when you flip and say Con majority should be odds on will be a moment of note.
    Very kind comment. The future is pretty uncertain right now. It may look clearer if the government can get through the winter. At the moment it is hard to see a lot of upside for the Tories while the other parties collectively have the insuperable advantage of not being the government.

    Of all the stuff coming our way, I think inflation is top of the pile for the Tories. It's the sort of issue that would make Brexiteers put Brexit down the priority list.

    Inflation is a huge issue as it destroys people's wealth.
    Well, that's not a problem for the poorest 30% who have nothing.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,695
    edited October 2021
    Opposition SPOLU gone ahead in Czech election with 98.33% counted.
    Well. On votes. One behind on seats. D'Hondt to blame I guess.
    Most votes to come in Prague where government is third by some way. Looks like billionaire Babis is for the chop.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,179

    IanB2 said:

    CNN: The United Kingdom is suffering from fuel shortages, gaps on supermarket shelves, rising inflation and slowing economic growth. Prime Minister Boris Johnson insists he isn't worried — but should he be?

    The reality is that Britain is taking longer to recover from the pandemic than many other large economies. UK GDP won't return to its pre-Covid-19 level until the first quarter of next year, according to Capital Economics. That's three months later than the eurozone, which includes G7 countries Germany, France and Italy. The US economy regained its previous size in July.

    Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics, argues the better comparison is to the period after World War II. In that case, huge numbers of workers flooded the jobs market but didn't have the right skills, resulting in labor shortages. The price of energy skyrocketed, and supply shortages fueled inflation. "All of this echoes the situation facing the UK and other advanced economies today — and appears ominous for those who worry we are now facing a return to much higher rates of inflation," said Shearing.

    Where are these fuel shortages and gaps on shelves and rising inflation and slowing growth is happening worldwide

    Apparently we have the highest growth in the G7

    It is true that there is a body of opinion that for its own purposes just wants, even wishes, the UK to fail

    Sad really
    Isn't that because we had the biggest fall in growth?
    My understanding is that the UK measures GDP in the public sector based in productivity, whereas other European countries measure it on cost.

    So our dip in GDP as result of covid was bigger due to methodological differences, and so is the increase coming out.

  • NEW THREAD

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 36,478

    malcolmg said:

    FF43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    image
    The implication of the article seems to be that France Germany and Spain have kept tighter restrictions in place. Do we think they will face higher case levels in the winter?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58849024

    It's certainly the case that more restrictions remain in place in most EU countries; from my own observations people are taking precautions very seriously in Germany, a little less so in Italy (the areas I visited are likely unrepresentative anyway) and even less so in France. Given the thoroughness of the German approach, their figures are the ones to watch to see how much difference the precautions make.

    I well remember last year, when the UK had a bad September (our weather was poor) while I was away in Germany and Italy and they were having a much better time of it - only for their rates to shoot up once I was back in October and their weather had turned. Whether the weather will make such a difference now that most adults are vaccinated will be key.
    It probably comes down to having good hygiene at this point. Scottish deaths are currently quarter of their peak and hospitalisations are running at half peak. English ones only lower because the peak was higher. Vaccines make a huge difference but Covid is still kicking.

    Does not seem to be helping NHS, my wife has just had her telephone consultation with consultant rescheduled to end of February 2022. It is a joke, that will make it 10 months between telephone calls.
    That isn't good at all Malc. I've got an 'in person' consultant appointment on Thursday and I really, really hope it goes ahead. Can't walk far, or drive, at the moment.
    @OldKingCole
    OKC, hope you get your appointment and get well soon
This discussion has been closed.