politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe LAB leadership contests can become an annual event

Options
System
System Posts: 12,578
edited July 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Maybe LAB leadership contests can become an annual event

TELEGRAPH: Matt shoots, scores. #tomorrowspaperstoday pic.twitter.com/DLSVXuTLks

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    First!
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    This bluff old traditionalist was stuck on the old thread!
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited July 2016
    FPT
    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    RobD said:

    This bluff old traditionalist was stuck on the old thread!

    To each his own ;)
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    FPT
    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
    Very good :D:p
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
    Very good :D:p
    I thought so too ;)

    He just mentioned immigration - how's your process doing?
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
    Very good :D:p
    I thought so too ;)

    He just mentioned immigration - how's your process doing?
    I think it's going! Be assured I will ping you if I encounter any serious difficulties! :p
  • williamglenn
    williamglenn Posts: 56,291
    Trump sounds so much better when he doesn't read the prompter.
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    We've got to the Wall!!!!
    I wonder who'll pay for it?
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    Tim_B said:

    We've got to the Wall!!!!
    I wonder who'll pay for it?

    Pension funds? :p
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    We've got to the Wall!!!!
    I wonder who'll pay for it?

    Pension funds? :p
    The money saved from not having sanctuary cities?
  • Tim_B
    Tim_B Posts: 7,669
    williamglenn said:

    Trump sounds so much better when he doesn't read the prompter.

    I don't know if you've tried it. It's even worse than autoscript on a camera. I've done it on local TV (read: fundraising on PBS).
  • MTimT
    MTimT Posts: 7,034
    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
    Very good :D:p
    I thought so too ;)

    He just mentioned immigration - how's your process doing?
    I think it's going! Be assured I will ping you if I encounter any serious difficulties! :p
    Wrong Tim. I think it is me you'll ping... :)
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    2016 set to be world's hottest year on record, says UN

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/2016-worlds-hottest-year-on-record-un-wmo?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    MTimT said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    RobD said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    RobD said:

    Didn't say "get her out"... a shame :p

    That's real self-discipline.
    That is not the first time she has been ejected from the convention this week.
    "get her out, and keep her out!" :D
    She was stuck on the old thread.....
    Very good :D:p
    I thought so too ;)

    He just mentioned immigration - how's your process doing?
    I think it's going! Be assured I will ping you if I encounter any serious difficulties! :p
    Wrong Tim. I think it is me you'll ping... :)
    Ah you've actually both kindly offered pointers!
  • MTimT
    MTimT Posts: 7,034
    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.

    Even further - the Shi'a-Sunni schism, i.e. 632 AD
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    The Independent: Liz Truss becomes first ever female Lord Chancellor. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw1JyQwCw
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    YellowSubmarine said:

    The Independent: Liz Truss becomes first ever female Lord Chancellor. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw1JyQwCw

    That doesn't look like a proper way to hold a mace!
  • ToryJim
    ToryJim Posts: 4,193
    Fraser Nelson reckons Labour are being outgunned on progressive politics.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/
  • OldKingCole
    OldKingCole Posts: 35,275
    MTimT said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.

    Even further - the Shi'a-Sunni schism, i.e. 632 AD
    They had, more or less, learned to live with that, though. To be fair to Sykes & Picot they did, at least in Iraq, assemble several exoisting Ottoman prvinces into one (oil rich) state.
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    City A.M.: Leaving the Single Market would blow a £14bn hole in the public finances. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw-qPovyw
  • GeoffM
    GeoffM Posts: 6,071
    YellowSubmarine said:

    2016 set to be world's hottest year on record, says UN

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/2016-worlds-hottest-year-on-record-un-wmo?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

    They said that about this year but it's felt a bit chilly so far.
    Hopefully they are right and next year will be better.
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    Irish Examiner: Five charged over Nice truck attack. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwycjVwCw
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    The Jerusalem Post - Israel News: Virtual exhibition showcases the life and times of Yitzhak Shamir. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwyMr_vyw
  • rcs1000
    rcs1000 Posts: 60,717
    FPT:
    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    image

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
  • rcs1000
    rcs1000 Posts: 60,717
    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    I think it goes back to that chap Moses, and his moving a bunch of people from Egypt to what is now called Israel.
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    Al Jazeera English: Libya: Tripoli condemns French military involvement. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwtPuUwCw
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    What, I hope, is a silly question for the panel here. After reading about the insurance supreme court case about the boat that sunk and lies deemed non material, I saw comments on the subject to the effect that dealer fitted parking sensors, clip on satnav etc are deemed as modifications to a car that are supposed to be declared and there was a case where a company tried to get out of a claim because of a sticker in a car?

    Surely such things are not material?
  • rcs1000
    rcs1000 Posts: 60,717
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    Sections of Great Barrier Reef suffering from 'complete ecosystem collapse'

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/sections-of-great-barrier-reef-suffering-from-complete-ecosystem-collapse?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
  • MTimT
    MTimT Posts: 7,034
    RobD said:

    YellowSubmarine said:

    The Independent: Liz Truss becomes first ever female Lord Chancellor. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw1JyQwCw

    That doesn't look like a proper way to hold a mace!
    I thought we had established that Eleanor was the first.
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
  • MTimT
    MTimT Posts: 7,034
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    More like 58%
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    The one demand of the Chartists that is unmet is annual parliaments. Then we could have annual leadership elections. 20% of seats up each first Thursday in May would add to the gaity of the nation.
  • RobD
    RobD Posts: 60,609
    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    Are zero hours contracts a thing in the US? (I realise the irony that I am the one asking!)
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited July 2016
    <
    YellowSubmarine said:

    Sections of Great Barrier Reef suffering from 'complete ecosystem collapse'

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/sections-of-great-barrier-reef-suffering-from-complete-ecosystem-collapse?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

    Ecosystems build up and collapse continuously.

    Its just that we have got this odd idea that things shouldn't change, also another odd idea that if the activities of any plant or animal except homo sapiens impact on the ecosystem it is a normal and natural part of Evolution, but activities of homo sapiens that have such effects are an unnatural abomination.
  • ToryJim
    ToryJim Posts: 4,193
    foxinsoxuk said:

    The one demand of the Chartists that is unmet is annual parliaments. Then we could have annual leadership elections. 20% of seats up each first Thursday in May would add to the gaity of the nation.

    I love elections but that is nuts.
  • MTimT
    MTimT Posts: 7,034
    edited July 2016
    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    An unintended consequence of Obamacare. Many reduced from 40 hours to 29 hour contracts.
  • rcs1000
    rcs1000 Posts: 60,717
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    :)

    My last chart. Change in the absolute number of people employed 2014 vs 1999:

    image
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    RobD said:

    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    Are zero hours contracts a thing in the US? (I realise the irony that I am the one asking!)
    I'm not sure on the detail but pretty sure there are similarly insecure forms of employment at the lower end.
  • SquareRoot
    SquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    test
  • rcs1000
    rcs1000 Posts: 60,717
    MTimT said:

    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    An unintended consequence of Obamacare. Many reduced from 40 hours to 29 hour contracts.
    I don't think that's the only reason: the gap widened long before the 2014 Obamacare implementation date.
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    MTimT said:

    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    An unintended consequence of Obamacare. Many reduced from 40 hours to 29 hour contracts.
    As they did from 37h to 16h under Browns tax credits.
  • Innocent_Abroad
    Innocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    You're quite sure Napoleon is blameless?

  • OldKingCole
    OldKingCole Posts: 35,275
    Totally O/T, but were the railway buffs on here somewhat disappointed with the programme on BBC2 last night. Far too much time spent on the slate quarries, interesting though that was and too little on train developement. The point about the standardisations of housing was good though, although I've got the impression that a lot of pre-railway development in the North was pretty standard across the region.
  • Paul_Bedfordshire
    Paul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    You're quite sure Napoleon is blameless?

    He is spot on about Sykes-Picot, not to mention the Balfour declaration.

    Basically an independent arab nation was promised as in return for tbem helping overthrow the Ottoman empire in WW1.

    Instead they were balkanised into several artificial colonies, sorry league of nations mandates, within the British and French empires with highly artificial boundaries.
  • DaveDave
    DaveDave Posts: 76
    ToryJim said:

    Fraser Nelson reckons Labour are being outgunned on progressive politics.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/

    But, but, but...Labour did relatively well again in by-elections overnight. As did Lib Dems, who are resurgent. I don't think Labour are finished. In fact, often when a party does badly nationally, it picks up locally,as a counter balance to the dominant govt. Most Mayors will be Labour, most cities will have Labour Council. This won't change. Labour are struggling in national govt only. A split would be stupid and insular (which I would love as a Tory). Their figures are good. Jezza is not unpopular with the real voters. Their left wing policies are loved by the lefties!
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Panorama on Trumps Angry America was interesting this week. Bakersfield California was a pretty bleak place on both sides of the tracks: http://bbc.in/29QsuZc

    I see the Donald has promised an end to crime and violence in the USA. That is even better than free owls!
  • ThomasNashe
    ThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    foxinsoxuk said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Panorama on Trumps Angry America was interesting this week. Bakersfield California was a pretty bleak place on both sides of the tracks: http://bbc.in/29QsuZc

    I see the Donald has promised an end to crime and violence in the USA. That is even better than free owls!
    Taken together with the promise of a wall between the US and Mexico, we've seen another quantum leap in the era of post-truth politics.
  • Jonathan
    Jonathan Posts: 22,107
    Trump sounds dangerous. His rhetoric is borderline fascist..

    I don't use that devalued word lightly, but can't think of a better one.
  • SquareRoot
    SquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

  • Jonathan
    Jonathan Posts: 22,107
    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
  • ToryJim
    ToryJim Posts: 4,193
    DaveDave said:

    ToryJim said:

    Fraser Nelson reckons Labour are being outgunned on progressive politics.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/

    But, but, but...Labour did relatively well again in by-elections overnight. As did Lib Dems, who are resurgent. I don't think Labour are finished. In fact, often when a party does badly nationally, it picks up locally,as a counter balance to the dominant govt. Most Mayors will be Labour, most cities will have Labour Council. This won't change. Labour are struggling in national govt only. A split would be stupid and insular (which I would love as a Tory). Their figures are good. Jezza is not unpopular with the real voters. Their left wing policies are loved by the lefties!
    I think local by-elections are poor guides. Too few and too localised that it's hard to say definitely that there is or isn't a national effect.

    Of course your point about councils going against national govt is valid. However it isn't really the ball game. National govt is where the action is and Labour are nowhere. They also don't seem to be hurting Conservatives in Conservative areas.
  • SouthamObserver
    SouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.

    Corbyn is no coalition-builder, that is for sure.

  • Innocent_Abroad
    Innocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    It didn't win that many elections - three landslides, three narrowly outright, and three minorities in 115 years. And, apart from the creation of welfare capitalism after 1945 (which was also managed by centre-right governments across the Channel). what did it do with any of those victories?

    Nothing its supporters have ever enthused about. Parliamentary socialism is a contradiction in terms.

  • Razedabode
    Razedabode Posts: 3,117
    DaveDave said:

    ToryJim said:

    Fraser Nelson reckons Labour are being outgunned on progressive politics.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/

    But, but, but...Labour did relatively well again in by-elections overnight. As did Lib Dems, who are resurgent. I don't think Labour are finished. In fact, often when a party does badly nationally, it picks up locally,as a counter balance to the dominant govt. Most Mayors will be Labour, most cities will have Labour Council. This won't change. Labour are struggling in national govt only. A split would be stupid and insular (which I would love as a Tory). Their figures are good. Jezza is not unpopular with the real voters. Their left wing policies are loved by the lefties!
    I think the point is Labour should be taking seats in by-elections, not holding onto safe seats. After all the turmoil, a divided Tory party, unpopular budgets etc, Labour continue to slip further behind. And now the Tories seem to have got their act back together again, they will continue to do so.

    I think your right in the sense Labour will take some mayorities, and hold onto their traditional key councils. But ultimately what is the point if it can't win the country.

    Interesting times.
  • david_herdson
    david_herdson Posts: 18,357
    Jonathan said:

    Trump sounds dangerous. His rhetoric is borderline fascist..

    I don't use that devalued word lightly, but can't think of a better one.

    America has always been a curious mixture of freedom and fascism. I blame the Pilgrim Fathers.
  • Philip_Thompson
    Philip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited July 2016
    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
  • Sandpit
    Sandpit Posts: 56,045
    Morning. More good trade deal news, this time from the Gulf States.
    http://www.thenational.ae/business/economy/brexit-sparks-fresh-free-trade-talks-between-the-gulf-and-uk
  • MattW
    MattW Posts: 28,309
    YellowSubmarine said:

    The Independent: Liz Truss becomes first ever female Lord Chancellor. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw1JyQwCw

    IS the Squeaker also shorter than his Mace?
  • DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 55,867
    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.
  • SquareRoot
    SquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    MattW said:

    YellowSubmarine said:

    The Independent: Liz Truss becomes first ever female Lord Chancellor. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw1JyQwCw

    IS the Squeaker also shorter than his Mace?
    It had not occurred to me but his ghastly wife has been very silent of late, long may it continue.
  • Innocent_Abroad
    Innocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    edited July 2016
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    1. Labour stands for the principles in its constitution.
    2. By rich Tories. (FWIW I was told by an estate agent - in the 1970s! - "no one ever nought their first home honestly".)

    And if that's good enough for you I really do hope you meet a slow and painful death.

  • not_on_fire
    not_on_fire Posts: 4,451
    Maybe Labour leadership contests could be part of the "season", just after the Hampton Court Flower Show.
    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Agreed, while Cameron and Osborne in charge I was prepared to vote Tory as long as I felt they could keep the fruity authoritarian/UKIP wing in check. Now, not so much. I'll be going back to the Lib Dems.
  • Sean_F
    Sean_F Posts: 39,132
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    Yeh, Labour will survive, however hard the leadership try to sink the ship.

    20% of the voters want a hard left party, and another 10% will vote Labour out of traditional loyalty.
  • david_herdson
    david_herdson Posts: 18,357
    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    No, it's far worse than the Tories and IDS.

    The Tories recognised that the writing was on the wall and were in position to dump IDS and unite around a new leader. Two years later, they'd elected David Cameron.

    By contrast, Labour has been taken over from within by an evangelical group which is comprehensively trashing the party machine. Deselections (or non-selections where seats are redrawn) have been threatened by Corbyn. The leadership is at war with his parliamentary party. Large parts of the party are at war with its MPs. The union leaders, for their own ends, are on the side of the wreckers.

    You say there's no alternative to Labour but that's incredibly complacent. Politics abhors a vacuum and an alternative will rise given enough opportunity. It might be the Lib Dems or it might be a breakaway party; both are possible, though Labour's fortunate that the Lib Dems are currently extremely weak. Even so, that's not something that can be guaranteed to remain the case, particularly if in alliance with an SDP2.
  • rottenborough
    rottenborough Posts: 66,867
    not_on_fire said:

    Maybe Labour leadership contests could be part of the "season", just after the Hampton Court Flower Show.

    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Agreed, while Cameron and Osborne in charge I was prepared to vote Tory as long as I felt they could keep the fruity authoritarian/UKIP wing in check. Now, not so much. I'll be going back to the Lib Dems.
    Morning all,

    I suspect that Hammond will have his hands firefighting a serious Brexit recession and not have time for other matters. It is going to be all hands to the pumps to steady the ship over rest of this Parliament (which will run its full course or near as damn it imho).
  • rottenborough
    rottenborough Posts: 66,867
    Afraid the Lab leadership won't be a long term annual event, since the party faces an existential visit to the voters in 2020. They may well rise up and put it out of its misery.
  • foxinsoxuk
    foxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Which piece by Nelson? It sounds interesting.

    Though do remember that the heydey of Cameron/Osborne was when they were in Coalition rather than majority government. Increasingly the coalition will be seen as a golden era of sane government.
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    Whether Labour leadership elections become an annual event depends n whether Smith can cut Corbyn's majority. If he does we may see several more challenges to grind Corbyn's physical and mental health down. Judging by the PMQ's footage they are both cracking.
  • TCPoliticalBetting
    TCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    rottenborough said:

    not_on_fire said:

    Maybe Labour leadership contests could be part of the "season", just after the Hampton Court Flower Show.

    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Agreed, while Cameron and Osborne in charge I was prepared to vote Tory as long as I felt they could keep the fruity authoritarian/UKIP wing in check. Now, not so much. I'll be going back to the Lib Dems.
    Morning all, I suspect that Hammond will have his hands firefighting a serious Brexit recession and not have time for other matters. It is going to be all hands to the pumps to steady the ship over rest of this Parliament (which will run its full course or near as damn it imho).
    You overlook the plague of locusts.
  • DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 55,867
    not_on_fire said:

    Maybe Labour leadership contests could be part of the "season", just after the Hampton Court Flower Show.

    DavidL said:

    Agreed, while Cameron and Osborne in charge I was prepared to vote Tory as long as I felt they could keep the fruity authoritarian/UKIP wing in check. Now, not so much. I'll be going back to the Lib Dems.
    It was not all good of course. QE and the zero interest rate policy have driven asset inflation to the considerable benefit of the better off. Efforts to rebalance the economy have had disappointing effectiveness. The deflationary consequences of 2008 remain with us and depressed house building and the supply of credit. But within the parameters that he had to work Osborne achieved remarkable things.

    I am concerned about May's authoritarian tendencies. This may prove unfair and simply a reflection of her role as Home Secretary but it worries me. I am also worried about the likes of David Davis and Fox in the government. We shall see.
  • Fat_Steve
    Fat_Steve Posts: 361
    rcs1000 said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    I think it goes back to that chap Moses, and his moving a bunch of people from Egypt to what is now called Israel.
    The invention of agriculture
  • DavidL
    DavidL Posts: 55,867
    foxinsoxuk said:

    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Which piece by Nelson? It sounds interesting.

    Though do remember that the heydey of Cameron/Osborne was when they were in Coalition rather than majority government. Increasingly the coalition will be seen as a golden era of sane government.
    Sorry, it was his piece in the Telegraph linked to downthread: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/

    I completely agree about the Coalition and accept that Danny Alexander should get considerable credit for steering Osborne in the right direction.
  • TCPoliticalBetting
    TCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    rottenborough said:

    Afraid the Lab leadership won't be a long term annual event, since the party faces an existential visit to the voters in 2020. They may well rise up and put it out of its misery.

    Labour are yet to address their near death in Scotland. Will the North go before Wales and leave London as the last stronghold?
  • rottenborough
    rottenborough Posts: 66,867
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    1. Labour stands for the principles in its constitution.
    2. By rich Tories. (FWIW I was told by an estate agent - in the 1970s! - "no one ever nought their first home honestly".)

    And if that's good enough for you I really do hope you meet a slow and painful death.

    The difference with IDS and the Tories is that in Labour's case, we can point to a case where they did fall off a cliff - Scotland. It can be argued that this is a different country etc etc, but there you go, it demonstrates that the deep, family roots to the party are worthless in the modern world. They have to win every vote now.

    The Liberals collapsed almost to nothing in the middle part of last century.

    It can happen.
  • PlatoSaid
    PlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    FPT - this was posted, just read it. Lots of interesting buttons pressed.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974
  • Moses_
    Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    rcs1000 said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    I think it goes back to that chap Moses, and his moving a bunch of people from Egypt to what is now called Israel.
    Tsk....I get the blame for everything around this joint.
  • rottenborough
    rottenborough Posts: 66,867
    ((Dan Hodges))) ‏@DPJHodges 8m8 minutes ago
    Calm down. Donald Trump is a poor man's Barry Goldwater. Hillary Clinton is going to obliterate him.

    oh dear, my small wager on hilary just started looking poor.
  • Casino_Royale
    Casino_Royale Posts: 63,687
    Sean_F said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    Yeh, Labour will survive, however hard the leadership try to sink the ship.

    20% of the voters want a hard left party, and another 10% will vote Labour out of traditional loyalty.
    I think those figures are the other way round.
  • YellowSubmarine
    YellowSubmarine Posts: 2,740
    rottenborough said:

    ((Dan Hodges))) ‏@DPJHodges 8m8 minutes ago
    Calm down. Donald Trump is a poor man's Barry Goldwater. Hillary Clinton is going to obliterate him.

    oh dear, my small wager on hilary just started looking poor.

    That's what we all ( including Dan ) said about Brexit.
  • PlatoSaid
    PlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Fat_Steve said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    I think it goes back to that chap Moses, and his moving a bunch of people from Egypt to what is now called Israel.
    The invention of agriculture
    We really shouldn't have climbed out of the water.
  • Casino_Royale
    Casino_Royale Posts: 63,687
    not_on_fire said:

    Maybe Labour leadership contests could be part of the "season", just after the Hampton Court Flower Show.

    DavidL said:

    The charts in Frazer Nelson's piece are certainly worth a look, particularly the chart showing who gained and who lost under Cameron/Osborne. Basically all those up to the 70th percentile gained with the top 25% losing out, the top 5% most of all.

    This is so different from the public perception. Osborne was exactly the sort of Chancellor that this country needed to address issues like inequality and unemployment. Will Hammond be able to keep up this remarkable record? Time will tell but I do not get the impression that he is driven by anything like the passion for fairness or helping the poor that Osborne showed.

    I am still gutted that the Cameron/Osborne government has gone. Although I believe that Brexit was the right choice the price was extremely high. We have had the privilege of one of the best governments doing the right things for the whole country that we are likely to see.

    Agreed, while Cameron and Osborne in charge I was prepared to vote Tory as long as I felt they could keep the fruity authoritarian/UKIP wing in check. Now, not so much. I'll be going back to the Lib Dems.
    Why don't you reserve judgement and see what happens?

    I think May 'may' be more effective on blue-collar conservatism and meritocracy than you might think.
  • Morris_Dancer
    Morris_Dancer Posts: 62,742
    Good morning, everyone.

    When does the court case run its course?
  • Casino_Royale
    Casino_Royale Posts: 63,687
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Philip_Thompson said:

    Jonathan said:

    SquareRoot said:


    Labour's eco system. built up over a century and more, it is dying before our very eyes and there is little that can be done to stop it,...

    Sadly you are right. This is how parties die. Labour's election winning coalition of the left is being dismantled by Corbyn.
    People said the same of the Tories under IDS etc

    Realistically there is no major challenger to replace Labour as official opposition. Even if Corbyn leads Labour to a worse defeat than Michael Foot did, what's going to happen next? Corbyn will have been shown to have failed, will leave in disgrace and be spoken about in similar tones to Foot. Labour will enter a period of rebuilding and eventually will, sadly, return to office.

    Sensible Labour folks should sit down and stop being hysterical. Start planning your post-2020 rebuilding now.

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?
    1. Labour stands for the principles in its constitution.
    2. By rich Tories. (FWIW I was told by an estate agent - in the 1970s! - "no one ever nought their first home honestly".)

    And if that's good enough for you I really do hope you meet a slow and painful death.

    You are a deeply disturbed individual.
  • PlatoSaid
    PlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Moses_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Tim_B said:

    FPT

    williamglenn said:

    https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/756316512814718976

    Sanders is also wrong. Actually the real cause of instability in the Middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot.
    I think it goes back to that chap Moses, and his moving a bunch of people from Egypt to what is now called Israel.
    Tsk....I get the blame for everything around this joint.
    Given that it's also been 40yrs or so since Labour won without Tory Tony - Jezza is their Moses leading the faithful to the Promised Land Socialist Utopia at last.
  • IanB2
    IanB2 Posts: 52,314
    ToryJim said:

    DaveDave said:

    ToryJim said:

    Fraser Nelson reckons Labour are being outgunned on progressive politics.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/21/the-tories-are-destroying-labour-with-their-progressive-policies/

    But, but, but...Labour did relatively well again in by-elections overnight. As did Lib Dems, who are resurgent. I don't think Labour are finished. In fact, often when a party does badly nationally, it picks up locally,as a counter balance to the dominant govt. Most Mayors will be Labour, most cities will have Labour Council. This won't change. Labour are struggling in national govt only. A split would be stupid and insular (which I would love as a Tory). Their figures are good. Jezza is not unpopular with the real voters. Their left wing policies are loved by the lefties!
    I think local by-elections are poor guides. Too few and too localised that it's hard to say definitely that there is or isn't a national effect.

    Of course your point about councils going against national govt is valid. However it isn't really the ball game. National govt is where the action is and Labour are nowhere. They also don't seem to be hurting Conservatives in Conservative areas.
    Yes and no. When you are fighting a local election, the national state of the parties is always in the background. Yes, an exceptional candidate, a big local issue and an energetic campaign has a greater chance of overcoming the national situation at a local election than a general, but it is still much easier to win when the tide is flowing in your favour than against.

    I thought last night's results were a little straw in the wind that Labour's image isn't suffering quite as much as I would have expected from the wall to wall national media coverage of their problems.

    Which I suspect is also an indication that Corbyn isn't as universally disliked out in the real world as you would think from the behaviour of the MPs.

    The other side of is coin - possibly - is that getting rid of Corbyn might actually cause more problems for Labour than some of the ABC people on here might think?
  • malcolmg
    malcolmg Posts: 44,523
    YellowSubmarine said:

    2016 set to be world's hottest year on record, says UN

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/21/2016-worlds-hottest-year-on-record-un-wmo?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

    Where do these absolute cretins measure these things , in a volcano. We hear this garbage year in and year out and it is still bollox.
  • ToryJim
    ToryJim Posts: 4,193
    Just seen pics from Trumps speech. How many flags did he stand in front of?
  • OldKingCole
    OldKingCole Posts: 35,275
    edited July 2016
    YellowSubmarine said:

    rottenborough said:

    ((Dan Hodges))) ‏@DPJHodges 8m8 minutes ago
    Calm down. Donald Trump is a poor man's Barry Goldwater. Hillary Clinton is going to obliterate him.

    oh dear, my small wager on hilary just started looking poor.

    That's what we all ( including Dan ) said about Brexit.
    That’s what’s so worrying.
  • rottenborough
    rottenborough Posts: 66,867
    PlatoSaid said:

    FPT - this was posted, just read it. Lots of interesting buttons pressed.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974

    Not read transcript, but seen media reports of the speech. It gives some clear clues as to how he will campaign: 'I am change', 'I am law and order' and most of all 'she won't change a thing'.

    I really think Clinton has a hell of fight on her hands now.

    Frank Luntz on Newsnight said basically if Trump can make the election about Hilary and her failings he can do it.
  • malcolmg
    malcolmg Posts: 44,523
    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Looks like they count it teh same way as UK does. The more people use foodbanks the less unemployment we have.
  • malcolmg
    malcolmg Posts: 44,523
    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    Paul_Bedfordshire said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    nunu said:

    Really weird how the U.S and U.K unemployment rates have been shadowing each other for years now. Both at 4.9%. I know the labor participation rate in the U.S has been falling, and the numbers will be measured differently, but still I find it a bit odd given how different our economies are.

    This is a chart of US employment vs unemployment from 1990 to 2009:

    As you can see (and as should be no surprise), there is a very high level of correlation between employment rate and unemployment rate.

    Now: US unemployment is 4.9%. Which means employment should be... oooh... around 62.5%.

    Would anyone care to guess what the actual US employment rate is?
    Ooo, is this like the price is right?

    My guess: 62.4%
    59.6%

    See: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

    That's a HUGE difference, and one that correlates with US unemployment closer to 9%.

    Now look at this: US unemployment vs US food stamps

    image
    Wow, that is totally discrepant from the other data points!
    Simples. Massive increase in part time/zero hours contract work at pay rates inadequate to live on without benefits.
    Are zero hours contracts a thing in the US? (I realise the irony that I am the one asking!)
    I'm not sure on the detail but pretty sure there are similarly insecure forms of employment at the lower end.
    They are even more insecure. Lots are employed on "working at will " terms which means they can sack you at short notice any time they want , for almost any reason and with minimum redundancy.
  • MarqueeMark
    MarqueeMark Posts: 55,459
    YellowSubmarine said:

    rottenborough said:

    ((Dan Hodges))) ‏@DPJHodges 8m8 minutes ago
    Calm down. Donald Trump is a poor man's Barry Goldwater. Hillary Clinton is going to obliterate him.

    oh dear, my small wager on hilary just started looking poor.

    That's what we all ( including Dan ) said about Brexit.
    The Betfair odds on Hillary - 82% - look oddly like those we saw on Remain too....
  • Scott_P
    Scott_P Posts: 51,453
    Philip_Thompson said:

    EDIT: Perhaps start by figuring an answer to these questions
    1: What does your vision of what Labour stands for?
    2: How is it paid for?

    As noted by Phil Collins in The Times, if 172 Labour MPs declare themselves a new party, they get the official opposition's Short money. And a few Unions would probably jump on board.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories