politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ups and downs. The referendum’s impact on individual politi
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ups and downs. The referendum’s impact on individual politicians
The nation’s politicians are consumed by the referendum debate. 23 June is seen as a momentous day. But politics will not stop on 24 June. Who has the campaign benefited so far? And, just as interestingly, who is on the wane?
Comments
-
First. And wouldn't "A good/bad campaign" rather than "The... " make more sense given the leading paragraph. A list of people having "a good/bad campaign", etc. Weird that people in different campaigns seem to be portrayed as being in "the" same one.
[My first thought was that you'd tweaked the noses of the leavers by referring to OUT as bad and vice versa!]0 -
FPT
Because that large rump is not simply "still there". Long term unemployment has come down considerably in the last six years. The long term unemployment rate now is just 1.5% when it was nearly 3% six years ago.Alanbrooke said:
or under skilled or allowed to live a life on benefits. But why after 6 years is that large rump still there ? It's not as if you can't encourage people in to work or train them skills in that timeframe.richardDodd said:AB.. Because most of that 1.7 million are bone idle
0 -
0
-
"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.0 -
He's not nailed his colours to the mast, he's nailed his trousers to the mast. This has left him unable to climb down and with all his vulnerabilities exposed for public observation/titillation.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.0 -
Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?0 -
FPT:
Good afternoon.
Has anybody heard of what's happening in Poland regarding reproductive rights? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/03/warsaw-protest-against-proposed-abortion-ban
I am horrified. Thank god I am British....0 -
FPT
But other than that Mrs Lincoln?Alanbrooke said:It's not the spending I really criticise him for that's simply cash management. It's the lack of reform in the economy, on taxation , on banking reform, on rebalancing the economy ( those BOP figures are a shocker ), on the pointless dicking about with small spin driven measures and genrally hogging one of the great offices of state whilst having no clear cut idea of what to do.
Actually it is the spending. A lot of time and effort is taken up by generating money to p&ss up the wall, or create a client state. Some of the brightest Lab people I know will argue till the cows come home that we didn't need austerity but they admit that GB spent too much.
GO inherited an economy which everyone said was out of control. It's the alligators and draining the swamp joke. He had to try to cut spending but that, he found, and which I agree is an indication of his naivety, is easier said than done (or not done, eventually, in several cases).
You mention reform, and an industrial strategy. But my guess is that "the deficit" came to be all pervasive and everything seen, apart from a bit of tinkering, through the deficit prism.
Now, does that make him a bad chancellor? Focusing on the one thing that dominated the debate and got the Cons voted in in the first place? Perhaps. But had he gone immediately off-book and taxed rich pensioners or tried to offer costly incentives to rebalance the economy, I believe he might easily not have got his second term in office.
Plus the alternative would have been and still is worse.0 -
Can't disagree with anything in the header.
There is clearly going to be some debate about what constitutes a "clear victory", to most voters this would be something around 45/55 or better, but I can see the government trying to spin a 48/52 win as a clear mandate, which might stretch credulity.
I think one the plausible range of results Cameron is going to be severely damaged in the country if not in the Tory Party, especially if he starts coming over all Billy Graham on the TV in the last couple of weeks.
He still hasn't finessed the question in a lot of the public mind to the effect of: If leaving the EU is such a catastrophe, why are you offering us a referendum on it, with the corollary that three month ago he was telling everyone that if he didn't get some pretty marginal changes he would come back and campaign for leave!0 -
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.0 -
Its interesting that abortion is a hot topic in many western countries, but here its essentially a non-issue.The_Apocalypse said:FPT:
Good afternoon.
Has anybody heard of what's happening in Poland regarding reproductive rights? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/03/warsaw-protest-against-proposed-abortion-ban
I am horrified. Thank god I am British....0 -
One coming through to make a positive impact for LEAVE.
"Britain 'will thrive after Brexit': Leaving will boost pay and jobs says Tory high-flier
Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom said wages would rise if UK left EU
She also claimed unemployment would fall with 'best stays still ahead'"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3521977/Britain-thrive-Brexit-Leaving-boost-pay-jobs-says-Tory-high-flier.html#ixzz44rlaLFTu0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubVc2MQwMkg
The Good:
Gove, May
The bad:
Johnson, Farage, Dave
The ugly:
George and subs (Javid and Hancock)0 -
Mr Meeks describes Gove as "one of the Conservative party’s big beasts". This doesn´t say much for the rest of them.
I always looked on Gove as a bit of a mouse.0 -
@Alanbrooke
I think there's another thing. I think our consumer debt driven culture is fundamentally bad for the industrial strength of our country. Rather than banks lending to industrial firms - and supporting them and being good partners - they'd rather extend unsecured personal loans to consumers, that get spent on new iPhone and flat-screen TVs from China.0 -
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
0 -
I like Andrea, and that's a good one to get. Of course, I doubt it would have any long-term impact on real wages. After all, we can only earn what our skills command on the world market.TCPoliticalBetting said:One coming through to make a positive impact for LEAVE.
"Britain 'will thrive after Brexit': Leaving will boost pay and jobs says Tory high-flier
Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom said wages would rise if UK left EU
She also claimed unemployment would fall with 'best stays still ahead'"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3521977/Britain-thrive-Brexit-Leaving-boost-pay-jobs-says-Tory-high-flier.html#ixzz44rlaLFTu0 -
Excellent summary.
The only one I do wonder about is Theresa May. I think that having declared for Remain against all expectations she cannot just sit there and refuse to get involved in the campaign. As a senior Minister she has to set out her stall. Either she starts making the case for her support for Remain or she will increasingly be seen as having chosen loyalty to the PM over her own beliefs with all the implications that will bring about being self serving.0 -
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?0 -
I loved Westerns - the stunt riding and horses were amazing. Oh to go back in time and see a Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. PBS has some great surviving footage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_West_showsPulpstar said:
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubVc2MQwMkg
The Good:
Gove, May
The bad:
Johnson, Farage, Dave
The ugly:
George and subs (Javid and Hancock)0 -
You'd certainly never get that impression from reading the thread headers on this site, which constantly opine about how useless/incoherent/rambling/mad the LEAVE side and its arguments are.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
Groupthink is always a wonderful thing.0 -
Corrected now. It was my fault. I uploaded Alastair's piece and formatted it wrongly.Anorak said:First. And wouldn't "A good/bad campaign" rather than "The... " make more sense given the leading paragraph. A list of people having "a good/bad campaign", etc. Weird that people in different campaigns seem to be portrayed as being in "the" same one.
[My first thought was that you'd tweaked the noses of the leavers by referring to OUT as bad and vice versa!]
I had Sergio Leone in my head at the time.0 -
Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.0
-
Agreed. Or loans to students to buy pizzas, to pay for rubbish degree courses, or just to pay the rent to some buy-to-let landlord who themselves has borrowed money to buy an ex-council house and rent it out to students. And this is called "growth"? It's not even production.rcs1000 said:@Alanbrooke
I think there's another thing. I think our consumer debt driven culture is fundamentally bad for the industrial strength of our country. Rather than banks lending to industrial firms - and supporting them and being good partners - they'd rather extend unsecured personal loans to consumers, that get spent on new iPhone and flat-screen TVs from China.
The next event as big as Lehman's could be 100 times as big. It's about time.
Who wants a society dominated by moneylenders, who typically - when they ever defend themselves - talk about lending money as though they're supplying a raw material or air or water?
The phrase "up against the wall" comes to mind.0 -
Yes it is. But his manner of campaigning is certainly dishonest, in particular the claims he has made about the'renegotiation'.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.0 -
Hard to argue with any of Alastair's points, but it's important to step back and take a longer view. UK politics is currently dominated by the referendum, but after June 24th the political landscape will look very different.0
-
Nonsense - it's polling on the relative arguments used by either side. That's entirely relevant since it's what activists and strategists will be using or not.
To handwave it away strikes me as daft - especially here.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?0 -
Best "End of Days" forecast today?
British Influence @britinfluence
Vote for #Brexit would lead to 'implosion' of the continental bloc, warns LSE chief0 -
It is but it just isn't true.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.
I'm not going to troll by telling you I know he doesn't really believe it, though I possibly could, but if I tell you that Cameron doesn't believe in anything would it help? He really doesn't. He's at best pragmatic. He has no beliefs and no vision. There are no grand plans. That really is him. Sometimes that can make for a good manager. Sometimes you get found out.0 -
ydoethur said:
He's not nailed his colours to the mast, he's nailed his trousers to the mast. This has left him unable to climb down and with all his vulnerabilities exposed for public observation/titillation.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
Haha! True
0 -
One chap not mentioned by Mr Meeks is the Labour "leader" for the REMAIN campaign, Alan Johnson. He should be cited with an M.I.A. award.0
-
Mr. Betting, is that implosion comment meant to be an argument for Leave or Remain?0
-
Hasn't society always been dominated by moneylenders?John_N said:
Agreed. Or loans to students to buy pizzas, to pay for rubbish degree courses, or just to pay the rent to some buy-to-let landlord who themselves has borrowed money to buy an ex-council house and rent it out to students. And this is called "growth"? It's not even production.rcs1000 said:@Alanbrooke
I think there's another thing. I think our consumer debt driven culture is fundamentally bad for the industrial strength of our country. Rather than banks lending to industrial firms - and supporting them and being good partners - they'd rather extend unsecured personal loans to consumers, that get spent on new iPhone and flat-screen TVs from China.
The next event as big as Lehman's could be 100 times as big. It's about time.
Who wants a society dominated by moneylenders, who typically - when they ever defend themselves - talk about lending money as though they're supplying a raw material or air or water?
The phrase "up against the wall" comes to mind.0 -
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
What are seen as liberal progressive values in the UK are not shared even by all of the EU, further afield they are not even reading the same book, never mind on the same page. We had our presidential election debate here a couple of weeks ago, there are five candidates standing. Four of the candidates oppose legalising divorce and three of them support the return of the death penalty.The_Apocalypse said:FPT:
Good afternoon.
Has anybody heard of what's happening in Poland regarding reproductive rights? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/03/warsaw-protest-against-proposed-abortion-ban
I am horrified. Thank god I am British....
0 -
My EU, my EU - my EU for a tampon!!TCPoliticalBetting said:
Best "End of Days" forecast today?
British Influence @britinfluence
Vote for #Brexit would lead to 'implosion' of the continental bloc, warns LSE chief0 -
I remember when his name was announced we were told what a good choice that was. from the same people who said he would make a 'fine' shadow chancellor I think.TCPoliticalBetting said:One chap not mentioned by Mr Meeks is the Labour "leader" for the REMAIN campaign, Alan Johnson. He should be cited with an M.I.A. award.
0 -
The voters are not going to be influenced by the results of the research but the results do give those betting on the outcomes an indication on what is driving opinion.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
0 -
In which case he shouldn't try to make more of his renegotiation and should just say he is happy to stay in with no change. It is the idiotic hyping of his non-victory than has been the cause of so much of his difficulty. He clearly doesn't believe that he can convince people to stay in an unreformed EU.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.0 -
Did he buy a book on "How to campaign"?runnymede said:
I remember when his name was announced we were told what a good choice that was. from the same people who said he would make a 'fine' shadow chancellor I think.TCPoliticalBetting said:One chap not mentioned by Mr Meeks is the Labour "leader" for the REMAIN campaign, Alan Johnson. He should be cited with an M.I.A. award.
0 -
Smiley.Plato_Says said:My EU, my EU - my EU for a tampon!!
TCPoliticalBetting said:Best "End of Days" forecast today?
British Influence @britinfluence
Vote for #Brexit would lead to 'implosion' of the continental bloc, warns LSE chief
0 -
You are absolutely right. In accordance with the long tradition of the great Conservative politicans (other than the special case of Maggie), there are no grand plans, just a wish to do whatever is in the best interests of the country - think R A Butler, Macmillan, Willie Whitelaw. That is exactly why Cameron is such a good PM.Estobar said:I'm not going to troll by telling you I know he doesn't really believe it, though I possibly could, but if I tell you that Cameron doesn't believe in anything would it help? He really doesn't. He's at best pragmatic. He has no beliefs and no vision. There are no grand plans. That really is him. Sometimes that can make for a good manager. Sometimes you get found out.
If you want beliefs and vision without reference to reality, vote Corbyn.0 -
This is an excellent, eminently readable, succinct, politically neutral, and debate-provoking (in a good way) thread header. It would sit very well on the website of a national paper.0
-
Yep. Perhaps if he had the luxury of a 4 week campaign he'd have got away with the magician's sleight of hand. The longer it goes on the worse it's getting for him.Richard_Tyndall said:
In which case he shouldn't try to make more of his renegotiation and should just say he is happy to stay in with no change. It is the idiotic hyping of his non-victory than has been the cause of so much of his difficulty. He clearly doesn't believe that he can convince people to stay in an unreformed EU.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.
0 -
Well if she thinks EU migration is nothing to do with her dept that would explain a lot.... Her dept "manages" the folk at the borders who let in the people and her dept sets the rules for various types of people who stay here. She also made a speech at the Conference last autumn full of concern about immigration. But, if you wish to believe its not her responsibility so be it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
.
All the stuff I'm googling has him wanting to change the terms of the UK's membership of the EU, not the EU itself. The former he has IMO succeeded in, the latter he never had a chance with and would have been foolish to try.Richard_Tyndall said:
In which case he shouldn't try to make more of his renegotiation and should just say he is happy to stay in with no change. It is the idiotic hyping of his non-victory than has been the cause of so much of his difficulty. He clearly doesn't believe that he can convince people to stay in an unreformed EU.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.0 -
Personally I'm quite happy for them not to care. They can not care all the way to their family barbeque and Britain's Got Talent. Leave voting to people who give a toss.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?0 -
Whose job is it then?Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
@taffys Yes, it's pretty odd. I don't understand how in 2016 people don't get that religion is a private matter. Catholics etc. can believe abortion/IVF/contraception is wrong all they like, but they have no right to control the reproductive rights' of others who do not subscribe to their beliefs. The two countries who I haven't heard anything negative about regarding reproductive rights in the Western world are France and Germany. Even in America, there seems to be this huge deal (especially in the GOP) surrounding abortion.
@Indigo What country are you based in? It seems shocking that in today's world there is a country where divorce isn't legalised
I find the support for the death penalty less shocking though.... 0 -
Had a long chat over the weekend with someone who is in the UK steel industry, these are the main points:
Government are not interested in saving heavy industry in this country
Doing business here is expensive because of Climate Change Act 2008
We have more onerous health and safety regulations than any other major developed country
The direction of travel is bad, Hinkley Point C shows that the government doesn't understand heavy industry
The DoE is infected with climate change bulls who wouldn't "give a fuck" if all heavy industry in the UK ceased operating as it would help them meet their quota
If we lose steel it will have knock on effects for construction, car making and capital goods production, all of which become less competitive
The EU want to impose US style tariffs on Chinese steel, Osborne blocked it from doing so, the EU thinks that he did so to curry favour with the Chinese in order to get investment for HPC and possibly HS2. They are in no mood to help UK steel and are saying the government have walked into its own trap.
I'm sure some of what was said was out of anger, but overall he seemed pretty pessimistic about heavy industry in the UK and manufacturing in general.0 -
Lots more coast- and border guard jobsTCPoliticalBetting said:One coming through to make a positive impact for LEAVE.
"Britain 'will thrive after Brexit': Leaving will boost pay and jobs says Tory high-flier
Energy Minister Andrea Leadsom said wages would rise if UK left EU
She also claimed unemployment would fall with 'best stays still ahead'"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3521977/Britain-thrive-Brexit-Leaving-boost-pay-jobs-says-Tory-high-flier.html#ixzz44rlaLFTu0 -
I'd like to amend your point. I think it can work well in times of peace and economic stability:hence your list fits the peace-time politicians. The problem now is that the world faces a major terrorist threat from lunatic muslim fanatics and the EU has become a powder keg. The cosy consensus which has worked ever since Maggie is over. We're entering a new era when someone with vision is required to sort out the bleedin' mess. It's precisely that kind of realisation amongst the masses which makes a demagogue like Trump appeal. Without going that far we do now need a leader, not a manager.Richard_Nabavi said:
You are absolutely right. In accordance with the long tradition of the great Conservative politicans (other than the special case of Maggie), there are no grand plans, just a wish to do whatever is in the best interests of the country - think R A Butler, Macmillan, Willie Whitelaw. That is exactly why Cameron is such a good PM.Estobar said:I'm not going to troll by telling you I know he doesn't really believe it, though I possibly could, but if I tell you that Cameron doesn't believe in anything would it help? He really doesn't. He's at best pragmatic. He has no beliefs and no vision. There are no grand plans. That really is him. Sometimes that can make for a good manager. Sometimes you get found out.
If you want beliefs and vision without reference to reality, vote Corbyn.0 -
lol is that meant to be a bad thing?TCPoliticalBetting said:Best "End of Days" forecast today?
British Influence @britinfluence
Vote for #Brexit would lead to 'implosion' of the continental bloc, warns LSE chief0 -
Plato - you asked about the relevance of Panama. The Guardian and Independent have gone big into attacking Cameron over it. What i have read is just smearing his father when 76 years old with a company founded 30 years before but they may find something unpleasant. Either way the key "Labour voters" may be influenced. Ironic if the more muck they chuck on Cameron the more LEAVE is likely to win.
Patrick O'Flynn @oflynnmep
With this tax haven stuff, I reckon many Lab voters will be feeling increasingly reluctant about the idea of voting to Save Dave on 23/6.0 -
What I wish to believe is irrelevant. The fact is that, whilst we remain members of the European Union, the Home Secretary cannot 'set the rules' for admitting EU citizens. Of course that will continue to be the case if we leave the EU and join to EEA, or sign up to any other trade deal which includes freedom of movement.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Well if she thinks EU migration is nothing to do with her dept that would explain a lot.... Her dept "manages" the folk at the borders who let in the people and her dept sets the rules for various types of people who stay here. She also made a speech at the Conference last autumn full of concern about immigration. But, if you wish to believe its not her responsibility so be it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
Oh, one last thing, we didn't get into the politics too much, but he says that the Labour government sold working class people in this country down a river in 2008 by pushing such onerous targets over and above the international consensus and that is, in the long term, going to hurt them in Wales and the North. He says UKIP could do well if they are able to nail the closure of heavy industry to Labour's 2008 Act. He also doesn't understand why the current Tory majority government don't repeal it and start again.0
-
I quite agree, I'm not sure any are on offer.
Are you still as keen on Mr Corbyn as you were? He's invisible on this issue.Estobar said:
I'd like to amend your point. I think it can work well in times of peace and economic stability:hence your list fits the peace-time politicians. The problem now is that the world faces a major terrorist threat from lunatic muslim fanatics and the EU has become a powder keg. The cosy consensus which has worked ever since Maggie is over. We're entering a new era when someone with vision is required to sort out the bleedin' mess. It's precisely that kind of realisation amongst the masses which makes a demagogue like Trump appeal. Without going that far we do now need a leader, not a manager.Richard_Nabavi said:
You are absolutely right. In accordance with the long tradition of the great Conservative politicans (other than the special case of Maggie), there are no grand plans, just a wish to do whatever is in the best interests of the country - think R A Butler, Macmillan, Willie Whitelaw. That is exactly why Cameron is such a good PM.Estobar said:I'm not going to troll by telling you I know he doesn't really believe it, though I possibly could, but if I tell you that Cameron doesn't believe in anything would it help? He really doesn't. He's at best pragmatic. He has no beliefs and no vision. There are no grand plans. That really is him. Sometimes that can make for a good manager. Sometimes you get found out.
If you want beliefs and vision without reference to reality, vote Corbyn.0 -
"Country"?Richard_Nabavi said:In accordance with the long tradition of the great Conservative politicans (other than the special case of Maggie), there are no grand plans, just a wish to do whatever is in the best interests of the country
That's an odd spelling of
"the City banks, the grouse moor, property spivs from the golf club, and mentally-damaged former public schoolboys who'd like to kick the stuffing out of anyone who insults the monarch, the church or the army, and out of all working single class mothers whether they insult anyone or not".
(I know you like my posts, Richard )
0 -
Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.0 -
Because the current government are basically the same as New Labour in most respects. As has become abundantly clear over the last year or so. There is barely anyone in the cabinet who is interested in doing genuinely conservative things.MaxPB said:Oh, one last thing, we didn't get into the politics too much, but he says that the Labour government sold working class people in this country down a river in 2008 by pushing such onerous targets over and above the international consensus and that is, in the long term, going to hurt them in Wales and the North. He says UKIP could do well if they are able to nail the closure of heavy industry to Labour's 2008 Act. He also doesn't understand why the current Tory majority government don't repeal it and start again.
0 -
I'm yet to hear anyone in real life bring the EU referendum up yet.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
The doctor's strike is far more topical it seems to me from what I hear people talk about.0 -
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.0 -
Mr. Runnymede, on certain areas, I agree. The New Labour/New Conservative views on foreign aid and global warming are indistinguishable. The idiotic mismanagement of energy policy is similar (the Conservatives are at least trying, albeit incompetently, to keep the lights on).0
-
I think the closure of industry is a big one too, it has dominated the news cycles and people seem genuinely worried that Britain is turning into a country that doesn't make anything.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm yet to hear anyone in real life bring the EU referendum up yet.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
The doctor's strike is far more topical it seems to me from what I hear people talk about.0 -
It's a bitter disappointment to me that at the hour of the country's need, Corbyn abandoned principles which were a significant strand of the post-war Labour movement. Leaders like Attlee (who was anti EU before it began), Foot, Benn, Heffer etc. would be turning in their respectives. I didn't always agree with Tony Benn but he nailed the EU for what it was. He saw that the huge centrist behemoth would ultimately crush workers rights and the sovereignty of parliament.Plato_Says said:I quite agree, I'm not sure any are on offer.
Are you still as keen on Mr Corbyn as you were? He's invisible on this issue.Estobar said:
I'd like to amend your point. I think it can work well in times of peace and economic stability:hence your list fits the peace-time politicians. The problem now is that the world faces a major terrorist threat from lunatic muslim fanatics and the EU has become a powder keg. The cosy consensus which has worked ever since Maggie is over. We're entering a new era when someone with vision is required to sort out the bleedin' mess. It's precisely that kind of realisation amongst the masses which makes a demagogue like Trump appeal. Without going that far we do now need a leader, not a manager.Richard_Nabavi said:
You are absolutely right. In accordance with the long tradition of the great Conservative politicans (other than the special case of Maggie), there are no grand plans, just a wish to do whatever is in the best interests of the country - think R A Butler, Macmillan, Willie Whitelaw. That is exactly why Cameron is such a good PM.Estobar said:I'm not going to troll by telling you I know he doesn't really believe it, though I possibly could, but if I tell you that Cameron doesn't believe in anything would it help? He really doesn't. He's at best pragmatic. He has no beliefs and no vision. There are no grand plans. That really is him. Sometimes that can make for a good manager. Sometimes you get found out.
If you want beliefs and vision without reference to reality, vote Corbyn.0 -
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.0 -
Wow really? I hear people talking about it the whole time: from nurses to school mums.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm yet to hear anyone in real life bring the EU referendum up yet.rcs1000 said:
The truly inconvenient truth is that - off boards like this - people don't really care.TCPoliticalBetting said:
An inconvenient truth.Plato_Says said:Let me repost the Red Box polling - since its not getting much attention.
We tested the messaging from campaigns on both sides, and found that on issue after issue, the Leave campaigns had more compelling arguments. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/the-europe-question/only-fear-can-keep-us-in-the-eu
How jolly inconvenient, eh?
The doctor's strike is far more topical it seems to me from what I hear people talk about.0 -
Jamie Ross
The man tells Nicola Sturgeon that the Vikings "not only took the best-looking women away, they took the best-looking sheep".0 -
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.0 -
I cannot see the line of "I cannot stop EU people coming here" going down well with the voters.Richard_Nabavi said:
What I wish to believe is irrelevant. The fact is that, whilst we remain members of the European Union, the Home Secretary cannot 'set the rules' for admitting EU citizens. Of course that will continue to be the case if we leave the EU and join to EEA, or sign up to any other trade deal which includes freedom of movement.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Well if she thinks EU migration is nothing to do with her dept that would explain a lot.... Her dept "manages" the folk at the borders who let in the people and her dept sets the rules for various types of people who stay here. She also made a speech at the Conference last autumn full of concern about immigration. But, if you wish to believe its not her responsibility so be it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
He has done neither.TOPPING said:.
All the stuff I'm googling has him wanting to change the terms of the UK's membership of the EU, not the EU itself. The former he has IMO succeeded in, the latter he never had a chance with and would have been foolish to try.Richard_Tyndall said:
In which case he shouldn't try to make more of his renegotiation and should just say he is happy to stay in with no change. It is the idiotic hyping of his non-victory than has been the cause of so much of his difficulty. He clearly doesn't believe that he can convince people to stay in an unreformed EU.rcs1000 said:
Alternatively, he's convinced that EU membership is in the best interests of Britain and is doing what he thinks is right.Estobar said:"David Cameron
David Cameron has been spending his political capital like a drunken sailor in port. He has little choice: if Remain lose the referendum, his authority will be over. His popularity is slipping as erstwhile supporters are offended by his aggressive backing for Remain. But what else can he do? "
Well I'll tell you what he could have done. He could have returned from Brussels and told the truth: 'there are a few concessions but I'm not really convinced it adds up to much so it's up to you folk to decide. I'm easy.'
Instead of which he's made a pillock of himself by nailing his colours to the (wrong) mast.
We might disagree with him, but that is a perfectly honorable thing to believe.0 -
The Guardian's attempt to smear Dave is quite amusing:MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
"Blairmore is shown to have been controlled using an obscure financial instrument known as bearer shares", going on to explain to its evidently ignorant readers what bearer shares are, and then helpfully adding that these 'obscure' instruments "were common among offshore funds at the time."
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/04/panama-papers-david-cameron-father-tax-bahamas
0 -
Conceivably the many 'I cannot stop X because of the EU' lines we have heard over many years have also not gone down too well. Hence Remain's polling problems...TCPoliticalBetting said:
I cannot see the line of "I cannot stop EU people coming here" going down well with the voters.Richard_Nabavi said:
What I wish to believe is irrelevant. The fact is that, whilst we remain members of the European Union, the Home Secretary cannot 'set the rules' for admitting EU citizens. Of course that will continue to be the case if we leave the EU and join to EEA, or sign up to any other trade deal which includes freedom of movement.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Well if she thinks EU migration is nothing to do with her dept that would explain a lot.... Her dept "manages" the folk at the borders who let in the people and her dept sets the rules for various types of people who stay here. She also made a speech at the Conference last autumn full of concern about immigration. But, if you wish to believe its not her responsibility so be it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
Why would it be anyone's job?Plato_Says said:Whose job is it then?
Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
If someone wants to move from Liverpool to Manchester or Nottingham to London then which cabinet minister is or should be responsible for that? Same if someone wants to move from Paris or Rome or Prague then why would it be anyone's job?0 -
Mr. Max, reminds me of energy.
People want a power source that offers security of supply, low prices, and zero carbon emissions, that can be turned up or down easily and isn't contingent on conditions we can't influence.
Pixie dust reactors would appear to be the way to go.0 -
Didn't the Tories criticise the 2008 Act for not going far enough?MaxPB said:Oh, one last thing, we didn't get into the politics too much, but he says that the Labour government sold working class people in this country down a river in 2008 by pushing such onerous targets over and above the international consensus and that is, in the long term, going to hurt them in Wales and the North. He says UKIP could do well if they are able to nail the closure of heavy industry to Labour's 2008 Act. He also doesn't understand why the current Tory majority government don't repeal it and start again.
UKIP's perennial problem in Labour areas is that its leadership is almost entirely composed of right-wingers.
0 -
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
0 -
I don't know if you are being deliberate obtuse, but I was referring to whether it was anything specifically to do with Theresa May - which it isn't. This isn't hard to understand, surely?TCPoliticalBetting said:
I cannot see the line of "I cannot stop EU people coming here" going down well with the voters.Richard_Nabavi said:
What I wish to believe is irrelevant. The fact is that, whilst we remain members of the European Union, the Home Secretary cannot 'set the rules' for admitting EU citizens. Of course that will continue to be the case if we leave the EU and join to EEA, or sign up to any other trade deal which includes freedom of movement.TCPoliticalBetting said:
Well if she thinks EU migration is nothing to do with her dept that would explain a lot.... Her dept "manages" the folk at the borders who let in the people and her dept sets the rules for various types of people who stay here. She also made a speech at the Conference last autumn full of concern about immigration. But, if you wish to believe its not her responsibility so be it.Richard_Nabavi said:
Why would EU migration - which is absolutely nothing to do with her role as Home Sec - be in the least bit relevant to her personal position?TCPoliticalBetting said:Interesting that no Govt cabinet person that has actually filled the media with words for REMAIN is having a good personal campaign. When Mrs May speaks out will be an interesting moment but she will be on weak ground with immigration. What if we really have a million more immigrants from the EU under her watch than the ONS stats? A mjaor challenge for her. If only she had gone with LEAVE. She would be odds on to replace Cameron.
0 -
Speaking of relatives
http://order-order.com/2016/04/04/corbyns-brother-promoted-israel-did-911-conspiracy/Piers Corbyn is seeking advice from his brother’s office after Guido revealed his ISIS-Israel conspiracy theories and attack on “Zionist” Labour MP Louise Ellman. Scrolling back through Jezza’s brother’s tweets, it just gets worse:
0 -
Mr. Observer, I'm not sure UKIP as rightwing necessarily matches reality. It's socially conservative, certainly, but from what I recall about its economic perspective that's heavily influenced by older Labour protectionism and the like.
I also agree with Mr. Max (and his top secret source) that UKIP *could* clean up in the north of England. However, being led by Farage may not prove helpful.0 -
Since the Guardian Media Group has used complex corporate vehicles based in the Cayman Islands to reduce it's tax liabilities, they blindly assume that everyone knows how these financial structures work.Richard_Nabavi said:
The Guardian's attempt to smear Dave is quite amusing:MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
"Blairmore is shown to have been controlled using an obscure financial instrument known as bearer shares", going on to explain to its evidently ignorant readers what bearer shares are, and then helpfully adding that these 'obscure' instruments "were common among offshore funds at the time."
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/04/panama-papers-david-cameron-father-tax-bahamas0 -
Stupid is as stupid does.SouthamObserver said:
Didn't the Tories criticise the 2008 Act for not going far enough?MaxPB said:Oh, one last thing, we didn't get into the politics too much, but he says that the Labour government sold working class people in this country down a river in 2008 by pushing such onerous targets over and above the international consensus and that is, in the long term, going to hurt them in Wales and the North. He says UKIP could do well if they are able to nail the closure of heavy industry to Labour's 2008 Act. He also doesn't understand why the current Tory majority government don't repeal it and start again.
UKIP's perennial problem in Labour areas is that its leadership is almost entirely composed of right-wingers.
Yes, to some degree, but I don't really think this is a left/right argument as can be seen from the Lab/Tory consensus to enforce laws and regulations which threaten heavy industry and working class jobs, it is probably a globalism vs localism issue, one in which UKIP could do well.0 -
I am no fan of Dave but I agree with Richard and Max that this bit of the Panama revelations really is scraping the barrel.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
I do think anyone saying these revelations are unimportant or uninteresting is being short sighted. They still have the potential to embarrass the Government - particularly the Ashcroft stuff and potentially some of the Tory Lords and former MPs - but more importantly it is possible they could bring down governments in some fairly unstable countries, not least Pakistan. As such I think this is all a matter of both interest and concern. But the stuff about Cameron's dad seems really desperate to me.
0 -
Fair enough, but in what world is Ian Cameron the same man as David Cameron? The former setting up his own tax affairs for optimal rates before the latter was old enough (born?) to understand the concept of tax isn't exactly damning stuff.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.0 -
It really is very funny:watford30 said:Since the Guardian Media Group has used complex corporate vehicles based in the Cayman Islands to reduce it's tax liabilities, they blindly assume that everyone knows how these financial structures work.
The signatories were authorised to perform complex financial tasks. They could, company minutes state, “sell or buy any stocks, shares, annuities” and even “precious metals”.
What the hell do they expect the directors of an offshore fund to be authorised to do?0 -
I disagree. The filthy rich use trusts and go offshore to dodge inheritance tax, to hide who the beneficial owners of interests actually are, whilst ensuring that the money gets passed down in the family. Trusts work by having beneficial owners who are different from the legal owners. David Cameron has questions to answer. Not that any mainstream editor will ask him any of them.MaxPB said:Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM.
The whole idea of the trust (which developed out of the "use", as any decent lawyer should know) came from the English jurisdiction, by the way. The Chancery Division of the High Court advertises the services it can provide in this area in a very big way. And not just to mafia bosses with connections to Russia, although of course they are very highly valued clients.
Britain stinks to high heaven where corruption and money laundering are concerned.
0 -
The father's activity is totally irrelevant.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am no fan of Dave but I agree with Richard and Max that this bit of the Panama revelations really is scraping the barrel.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
I do think anyone saying these revelations are unimportant or uninteresting is being short sighted. They still have the potential to embarrass the Government - particularly the Ashcroft stuff and potentially some of the Tory Lords and former MPs - but more importantly it is possible they could bring down governments in some fairly unstable countries, not least Pakistan. As such I think this is all a matter of both interest and concern. But the stuff about Cameron's dad seems really desperate to me.
If person A jointly inherited a bucket of offshore family money from his or her parents, and chooses to keep that money offshore, fine. Good luck to person A.
But if person A at the same time has the power to set MY onshore tax rates???? No way. Because person A has skin in another game.0 -
If these are example of "complex financial tasks" to the left then is it any wonder that Labour gave us the worst deficit since the war.Richard_Nabavi said:
It really is very funny:watford30 said:Since the Guardian Media Group has used complex corporate vehicles based in the Cayman Islands to reduce it's tax liabilities, they blindly assume that everyone knows how these financial structures work.
The signatories were authorised to perform complex financial tasks. They could, company minutes state, “sell or buy any stocks, shares, annuities” and even “precious metals”.
What the hell do they expect the directors of an offshore fund to be authorised to do?0 -
Like what? I'm interested in your point of view and what meaning you give to the word "conservative".runnymede said:Because the current government are basically the same as New Labour in most respects. As has become abundantly clear over the last year or so. There is barely anyone in the cabinet who is interested in doing genuinely conservative things.
I understand the difference between "conservative" and "reactionary", so I assume you don't mean things like reintroducing the playing of "God save the queen" in cinemas, theatres and concert halls.
Would it be "conservative" or "not conservative" to whack the City of London down to size? Or other spivs, such as the ones behind "academy" schools? Or to tell the banks to stop lending so much?
Just asking.
0 -
The Guardian is noted for its headlines which smear but which turn out to be baseless when the final text is read. Similarly The Independent and The Daily Wail. Bait and click stuff.Richard_Nabavi said:
The Guardian's attempt to smear Dave is quite amusing:MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
"Blairmore is shown to have been controlled using an obscure financial instrument known as bearer shares", going on to explain to its evidently ignorant readers what bearer shares are, and then helpfully adding that these 'obscure' instruments "were common among offshore funds at the time."
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/04/panama-papers-david-cameron-father-tax-bahamas
0 -
The example which I think captures best the hollowness of our economy was a woman who had a "portfolio" (I hate that word) of buy-to-let properties, the majority of which were let out to people on housing benefit. She had the gall to say that she wanted to make her own way, work hard herself, and "not rely on the state for handouts".John_N said:
Agreed. Or loans to students to buy pizzas, to pay for rubbish degree courses, or just to pay the rent to some buy-to-let landlord who themselves has borrowed money to buy an ex-council house and rent it out to students. And this is called "growth"? It's not even production.rcs1000 said:@Alanbrooke
I think there's another thing. I think our consumer debt driven culture is fundamentally bad for the industrial strength of our country. Rather than banks lending to industrial firms - and supporting them and being good partners - they'd rather extend unsecured personal loans to consumers, that get spent on new iPhone and flat-screen TVs from China.
The next event as big as Lehman's could be 100 times as big. It's about time.
Who wants a society dominated by moneylenders, who typically - when they ever defend themselves - talk about lending money as though they're supplying a raw material or air or water?
The phrase "up against the wall" comes to mind.
The state who was directly funding all her BTL mortgages that is... Jesus wept.
March of the Makers might be the most hollow phrase of recent political history.0 -
So what should the PM do? It sounds like you are saying he should go back in time and stop his dad from moving his business off shore.taffys said:
The father's activity is totally irrelevant.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am no fan of Dave but I agree with Richard and Max that this bit of the Panama revelations really is scraping the barrel.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
I do think anyone saying these revelations are unimportant or uninteresting is being short sighted. They still have the potential to embarrass the Government - particularly the Ashcroft stuff and potentially some of the Tory Lords and former MPs - but more importantly it is possible they could bring down governments in some fairly unstable countries, not least Pakistan. As such I think this is all a matter of both interest and concern. But the stuff about Cameron's dad seems really desperate to me.
If person A jointly inherited a bucket of offshore family money from his or her parents, and chooses to keep that money offshore, fine. Good luck to person A.
But if person A at the same time has the power to set MY onshore tax rates???? No way. Because person A has skin in another game.0 -
Latest German poll shows a 9% swing from the Christian Democrats to AfD compared to the last election:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahl_zum_19._Deutschen_Bundestag#Sonntagsfrage0 -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/04/why-wont-labours-sadiq-khan-say-he-supports-jeremy-corbyn/
Norman Smith, the interviewer, was keen to ask his views on Mr Corbyn. Mr Khan was keen not to give them.
Did he think his chances of winning were improved by having Mr Corbyn as his leader? “To deprive the Labour movement of a chance to vote for all the candidates they could… would have been wrong,” replied Mr Khan, presumably mishearing the question.
But did he think Mr Corbyn had put him in a better position to win? “Norman, I tell you what, I’m working my socks off to win the London election!” replied Mr Khan, apparently still struggling to catch his interviewer’s questions.
But was he a supporter of Mr Corbyn? “Of course I support the Labour party!” replied Mr Khan.0 -
I am presuming the guardian used a different law firm when they did their tax dodging.0
-
I've been chatting to a journalist about this story this afternoon.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am no fan of Dave but I agree with Richard and Max that this bit of the Panama revelations really is scraping the barrel.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
I do think anyone saying these revelations are unimportant or uninteresting is being short sighted. They still have the potential to embarrass the Government - particularly the Ashcroft stuff and potentially some of the Tory Lords and former MPs - but more importantly it is possible they could bring down governments in some fairly unstable countries, not least Pakistan. As such I think this is all a matter of both interest and concern. But the stuff about Cameron's dad seems really desperate to me.
He said the fallout is if any Party donors used these tax minimisation strategies.
There might be pressure on the political parties to return these donations.0 -
MaxPB said:
So what should the PM do? It sounds like you are saying he should go back in time and stop his dad from moving his business off shore.taffys said:
The father's activity is totally irrelevant.Richard_Tyndall said:
I am no fan of Dave but I agree with Richard and Max that this bit of the Panama revelations really is scraping the barrel.taffys said:
No. My point is that anybody who has the ultimate power to set UK tax rates should be completely subject to those tax rates, and arrange their affairs so that they are completely subject to them.MaxPB said:
So Dave the 3 year old should have told his dad, please don't avoid the tax because I'm going to be PM one day and this will look bad?taffys said:
I'm still not sure that is good enough.MaxPB said:
Tbh, what Dave's dad did or didn't do with his own company has nothing to do with the government or Dave's ability to be PM. It's a cheap shot by a desperate bunch and to be fair to the PM he has done more for clamping down on tax evasion and aggressive avoidance than 50 years of previous government action.taffys said:Is anybody else a bit disturbed by number 10s 'private matter' comment on Panama...??
I'm not sure that will do for voters, to be honest.
Hypothetically, I wouldn't want to have my tax rates decided by somebody who did not have all of their skin in the same game, so to speak.
I do think anyone saying these revelations are unimportant or uninteresting is being short sighted. They still have the potential to embarrass the Government - particularly the Ashcroft stuff and potentially some of the Tory Lords and former MPs - but more importantly it is possible they could bring down governments in some fairly unstable countries, not least Pakistan. As such I think this is all a matter of both interest and concern. But the stuff about Cameron's dad seems really desperate to me.
If person A jointly inherited a bucket of offshore family money from his or her parents, and chooses to keep that money offshore, fine. Good luck to person A.
But if person A at the same time has the power to set MY onshore tax rates???? No way. Because person A has skin in another game.
Any benefits accruing to a PM offshore should be brought onshore and be subject to the taxation the PM imposes upon the rest of us.0 -
If the full extent of this in terms of British elite is just a few Lords & donors I will in a way be pleasantly surprised...however I am guessing there will be much more juicy stuff that guardian / bbc are going to drag out of course of next few weeks to keep their big scoop in the news (at least that is what I would do)0
-
ML Battlefield Tours
#OnThisDay 1949 in post war Europe NATO is formed0 -
O/T There's a curious finding in the new Opinium London Mayoral poll:
http://ourinsight.opinium.co.uk/survey-results/khan-holds-his-lead-over-goldsmith-london-mayoral-race
The overall figures haven't changed very much, but they are reporting a big swing (10 points!) to Sadiq in central London since February, offset by a 7-point swing to Zac in the outer areas. (This is after 2nd prefs were taken into account).
I wonder if this is a real effect, of each candidate solidifying his base? It seems to be rather a large pair of shifts.0
