politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly politics has got exciting and harder to predict
Within the next few hours we should get the first full voting intention poll to have been carried out entirely after EdM’s big Brighton speech. Let’s hope that the Sun releases its YouGov survey this side of midnight rather than us having to wait until the morning.
Comments
-
First. rEd for PM.0
-
Conservative Business Interests!0
-
I'm expecting UKIP to offer £145, by making not having a TV licence a civil, rather than criminal offence.welshowl said:Foxinsoxuk:
Good point you can hand back £120 or whatever dead easy to one section if you claw it back somewhere else.
Suppose the Tories could say " let's cut fuel VAT by x % " and you get a fuel price cut with us rather than Ed's freeze and with no law of unintended consequences risk of cutting supply or the need to buy in candles just in case... But the books have to balance somewhere else.
http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/842-ukip-call-for-bbc-non-payment-to-be-made-a-civil-not-criminal-offence
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/bbctrusteeelectionandlicencefee.html
0 -
FPT
@Chuvapp
The CBI Survey on September Sales
Key findings:
• 46% of respondents reported that sales volumes were up on a year ago, while 12% said they were down, giving a balance of +34% - the strongest since June 2012 (+42%) and exceeding expectations (+26%)
• Retailers expect sales volumes to grow at a similarly strong pace next month (+31%)
• There was a broad-based increase in sales across many sub-sectors with furniture & carpets, department stores, recreational good retailers and grocers performing strongly:
• A balance of +100% of furniture & carpets retailers said business volumes were up – the strongest since August 1996.
• 52% of department stores said business volumes were up, while 0% said they were down, giving a balance of +52%
• 65% of recreational goods retailers said business volumes were up, while 0% said they were down, giving a balance of +65%
• 50% of grocers said business volumes were up, while 17% said they were down, giving a balance of +33%.
• Chemists were the only sub-sector to report a fall in business volumes (-72%)
• Overall, 22% of retailers said that sales volumes were above average for the time of year, while 10% said they were below average, giving a balance of +12% - the highest survey balance since December 2010 (+18%)
• 36% placed more orders with suppliers than they did a year ago and 22% placed fewer, with the resulting balance of +14%.
Wholesalers
50% of wholesalers said sales volumes were up while 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +40% - the strongest pace of growth since June 2013 (+45%). Most sub-sectors saw growth, with building materials (+100%) and clothing, textiles & footwear (+56%) in the lead. Only food & drink saw a decline in sales (-13%), marking the first year-on-year fall since May. Overall, sales are expected to rise solidly again in the year to October, but at a slower pace than this month (+28%).
Motor traders
64% of motor traders said sales volumes were up while 36% said they were down, giving a balance of +28%, a slower pace of growth than in the previous month (+93%).0 -
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
FPT @Chuvapp
Not sure about that, Avery.
I think:
a) Conservative Business Interests has a better ring to it.
and:
b) is more topical given next week's party conference
Sunil
The most important part of the CBI statement was its concluding paragraph:
The best way to raise living standards is through growth. It's only when we start to see solid and sustainable growth that wages will pick up and people will start to feel better off.
The UK is currently experiencing growth which is not only above the country's fifty year trend level; not only above the EU average and all large European countries including Germany; but also above the OECD average and above its individual members such as the US, Japan and Canada.
If this rate of growth can be sustained through to the end of Q2 2015, it will do far more to improve living standards than any regulatory intervention or market fiddling being proposed by Ed Miliband.
So the real question that should be asked today is not whether Ed is right - any economist will tell you price controls don't work both from theory and known practice - but whether Osborne can maintain the current rate of growth in the UK economy through to the election. If he can, the debate on living standards and energy costs will be long dead before voters mark their crosses..
Now we cannot forecast that far forward with a high degree of reliability, even if we exclude the potential impact of external shocks. But the probability of sustained growth is getter higher by the month, This can be concluded not just from UK data but from better figures from our trading partners, especially in the EU and the US.
And we can look at short term indicators in the UK which are all pointing to sustained growth even if maybe a little off its peak in mid summer.
I have posted separately downthread key findings from today's CBI report on September sales, the first of three main retail sales reports for the month. Read it and consider whether its contents are a better or worse guide to the future prospects for UK standards of living than anything said by Ed Miliband in his speech yesterday.0 -
Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?0
-
@Avery
totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.
When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?
0 -
0
-
Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/
First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.
Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.0 -
What is instructive about this policy, in other words, is not so much its detail, for there is precious little of that. Rather, it is what it tells us about Mr Miliband’s instincts. It shows that when he sees a problem, his answer is to turn to the state to act, even when it is the state that is the problem. Where the Conservatives have sought to reshape the planning system so as to give local communities a say (even while weighting the incentives to encourage development), Mr Miliband’s policy is to let bureaucrats determine what must be built and where. If businesses do not go along with his ideas, they will be hectored – or punished – until they comply. This is a vision of the state that is not so much Blairite as Bolivarian, with Mr Miliband as the beret-clad leader of a populist crusade which seeks to harness free enterprise to social goals ordained by the state.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10333503/Labours-housing-policy-is-incoherent-and-statist.html0 -
anything less than 45% for Red Ed and it's a disaster....
....
0 -
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/Scott_P said:Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.
First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.
Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.
You're right, Scott. Miliband is terrifying the Tories.0 -
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
Of the House of Miliband - " Ils n’ont rien appris, ni rien oublié. "0
-
I expect a boost of Labour.
Labour are coming out with some high profile, populist policies: who doesn't want lower energy bills? The interesting moment is going to come closer to the election in my opinion: will people, when forced to make the decision, get scared about rocking the boat with Labour? After all, minds will be much more concentrated when these things crop up in an election campaign.0 -
St George is like a Russian pole vaulter, Surby, but without the social prejudices.surbiton said:
The CBI Survey on September SalesSunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
Wholesalers
50% of wholesalers said sales volumes were up while 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +40% - the strongest pace of growth since June 2013(+45%).
Yes, that was just two months back.
He breaks his own records is small steps collecting plaudits and awards each time.
0 -
I believe there is Charles, it's called power cuts, no internet no amazon ( no PB! ). Ed's on the case chillax ;-).Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
Bubka was Ukranian, Avery.0
-
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
Conventional wisdom would suggest a poll boost for Labour this week followed by one for the Tories next week.0
-
You're right, Scott. Miliband is terrifying the Tories.surbiton said:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/Scott_P said:Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.
First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.
Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.
Is this "one Labour MP" Hodges spoke to the very same Labour MP he has used as a source for every other column he's written?
0 -
Chippy Bumpkin IrishmenAlanbrooke said:
0 -
Hypocrisy can be a beautiful thing when done well. To go, as Ed Miliband has done, within four years, from being the minister insisting that energy prices must rise — so uncompetitive green energy producers can be enticed to supply power — to being the opposition leader calling for energy prices to be frozen is a breathtaking double axel that would make Torvill and Dean envious.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article3879192.ece
Remember this is the very architect of our current energy policy, the man who steered the suicidally expensive Climate Change Act through Parliament; the man who even this week pledged to decarbonise the entire British economy (not just the electricity sector) by 2030, meaning that nobody will be permitted to heat their house with gas.
Has he checked the price of electric heating versus gas recently? The gap is due to grow greater. By 2030 much of the electricity will, in theory, come from offshore wind, which is being promised three times the price that gas-fired power stations get for making electricity. So Mr Miliband is telling us to treble, and freeze, our heating bills at the same time.0 -
Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.surbiton said:@Avery.
What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.0 -
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
"helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more"
I do wish people would stop lumping amazon in with the likes of google and starbucks, when they talk about these massive companies making huge profits and dodging tax on them.
Amazon have huge sales numbers, but despite I'm sure setting themselves up in a "tax efficient" manner, actually make very very little in percentage terms.
In fact, many analysts say they have to calibrate their business away from still thinking of a new start-up trying to land grab as much as possible to one that makes much better returns,
"Investors, comforted by Bezos’s consistency with this strategy over the years, have so much faith in him that they’re willing to tolerate razor-thin or nonexistent profits in exchange for continued market share gains and a promise of windfall profits someday. And by the way, low margins to Bezos are a competitive advantage. If you’re eking out sub-2 percent profits, which Amazon is doing, your market isn’t very enticing to rivals. When margins are nice and fat, your business is a delectable target."
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-08/amazons-jeff-bezos-doesnt-care-about-profit-margins
So criticism Amazon for trying to dominant the market and wipe out the competition (they have certainly been extremely aggressive in that respect and ultimately I'm sure they will maximise on it), but currently they aren't making the sort of profit that say a Starbucks do on a cup of coffee.
The reason Amazon can offer you a book or dvd so cheap is they have been ahead of the game with ultra efficient IT / logistics and wafer-thin margins.
0 -
Cockney Bob's InsolventBobajob said:0 -
To continue on from the point that @Foxinsoxuk made on the previous thread about this Labour Conference heralding the death of New Labour. I think that this Labour Conference also saw Ed Miliband quietly capitulate to the big Labour Union donors after picking a fight with them earlier this year. I fully expect to see Ed Miliband now quietly shelve that fight while his team and the Unions work out a face saving all around deal that will talk big but see little change to the current set up.
Ed Miliband will now turn his guns on big business until that strategy finally bites him on the behookie as well. Its going to be interesting to if Ed Miliband's internal opponents decide to leave him in place until after the next GE even if the polls swing decisively against the party because they cannot agree on one clear choice as his replacement.0 -
Just seen this on Labour Uncut..... Is this Hodges again???
Ed Miliband has chosen the path of least resistance in targeting big bad business. It’s a message that plays well to the party faithful, but the next election will be decided by an audience far larger than a conference hall in Brighton.
An audience that will have read their morning papers and had many of their fears about Labour confirmed.
Atul Hatwal is editor of Labour Uncut
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/today-the-tories-are-happy-thats-all-you-need-to-know-about-eds-speech/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=buffer45e20&utm_medium=twitter0 -
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
I thought you might be, Avery. As ever you are dazzled by presentation - Bobajobka set more world records0
-
Clueless Borrowing IdiotsAlanbrooke said:
Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.surbiton said:@Avery.
What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.0 -
Carl Maxim @carlmaxim 3h
One person broke the fire brigade picket line at Trumpton, or as they are now known, Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Scab.
Retweeted by tom jamieson0 -
Is that true? YouGov surveys are normally carried out over 2 days and I think they may re-use the second day's results in the following poll - the fact that the recent "blip" of 0% and 1% Labour leads lasted 2 days suggests that the "outlier" reults were used twice.Mike Smithson said:Within the next few hours we should get the first full voting intention poll to have been carried out entirely after EdM’s big Brighton speech.
So, in the normal run of things, surely tomorrow's poll will have been carried out today and yesterday. Unless they are doing a special entirely post-speech poll.
0 -
Due to Child Benefit InjusticeAlanbrooke said:
Cockney Bob's InsolventBobajob said:
0 -
Still Ed at this rate will solve Hollande's worries about the French London brain drain - disparation des cerveaux??? :-) - he could end up making Paris look like Dubai Enterprise Zone in comparison.MonikerDiCanio said:Of the House of Miliband - " Ils n’ont rien appris, ni rien oublié. "
0 -
That's corporation tax, rather than rates though isn't it?Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
Is Peter M = Lord of Darkness? Sounds like he's not happy with Red either if so, but ok Bad Al is....
Alastair Campbell@campbellclaret1m
Peter M wrong re energy policy being shift to left. It is putting consumer first v anti competitive force. More New Deal than old Labour0 -
Clearly bonkers idiot?Alanbrooke said:
Cockney Bob's InsolventBobajob said:0 -
Cant Blame IDSBobajob said:
Due to Child Benefit InjusticeAlanbrooke said:
Cockney Bob's InsolventBobajob said:0 -
Good evening, comrades.
Why did Miliband ever try and claim he wasn't Red Ed? Price controls and land confiscations are hardly centrist policies.0 -
Are you going to quote Dan Hodges on the Friday when Ed stands in front of No.10 ?fitalass said:To continue on from the point that @Foxinsoxuk made on the previous thread about this Labour Conference heralding the death of New Labour. I think that this Labour Conference also saw Ed Miliband quietly capitulate to the big Labour Union donors after picking a fight with them earlier this year. I fully expect to see Ed Miliband now quietly shelve that fight while his team and the Unions work out a face saving all around deal that will talk big but see little change to the current set up.
Ed Miliband will now turn his guns on big business until that strategy finally bites him on the behookie as well. Its going to be interesting to if Ed Miliband's internal opponents decide to leave him in place until after the next GE even if the polls swing decisively against the party because they cannot agree on one clear choice as his replacement.
0 -
-
Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer.FrancisUrquhart said:"helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more"
I do wish people would stop lumping amazon in with the likes of google and starbucks, when they talk about these massive companies making huge profits and dodging tax on them.
Amazon have huge sales numbers, but despite I'm sure setting themselves up in a "tax efficient" manner, actually make very very little in percentage terms.
In fact, many analysts say they have to calibrate their business away from still thinking of a new start-up trying to land grab as much as possible to one that makes much better returns,
"Investors, comforted by Bezos’s consistency with this strategy over the years, have so much faith in him that they’re willing to tolerate razor-thin or nonexistent profits in exchange for continued market share gains and a promise of windfall profits someday. And by the way, low margins to Bezos are a competitive advantage. If you’re eking out sub-2 percent profits, which Amazon is doing, your market isn’t very enticing to rivals. When margins are nice and fat, your business is a delectable target."
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-08/amazons-jeff-bezos-doesnt-care-about-profit-margins
So criticism Amazon for trying to dominant the market and wipe out the competition (they have certainly been extremely aggressive in that respect and ultimately I'm sure they will maximise on it), but currently they aren't making the sort of profit that say a Starbucks do on a cup of coffee.
The reason Amazon can offer you a book or dvd so cheap is they have been ahead of the game with ultra efficient IT / logistics and wafer-thin margins.
Still happy?0 -
If YouGov was really startling in any direction, we'd be getting Sun tweets by now - even if the results were unwelcome, the journalist's instincts would win.0
-
Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.Charles said:I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more
0 -
Clapham Boy's Intelligent.Bobajob said:
Clueless Borrowing IdiotsAlanbrooke said:
Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.surbiton said:@Avery.
What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.0 -
0
-
Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/0 -
Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.felix said:
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom0 -
"terreur rouge", Moniker.MonikerDiCanio said:Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-242408690 -
"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."
I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.
Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.
As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!! Amazon or no Amazon, there are numerous internet stream providers. Netflix was a massive rental DVD operator, foresaw what was coming (Blockbuster didn't) and now dominants the US streaming market.0 -
Not sure of your point? It's about total tax take not the specific line of tax. Their approach, though, reveals a lot about their attitude.anotherDave said:
That's corporation tax, rather than rates though isn't it?Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
0 -
I'm on fire - and I've only spent 15 mins this evening as been too busy most of the day.
Another rip-snorter from another Hodges nom-de-plume?
It seems clear to me that the Labour leader's speech, and the policies he announced, will simply reinforce voters' perceptions of the Labour Party - hates business, loves welfare, couldn't give a crap about the deficit - rather than challenging them and expanding his party's appeal.
http://marbury.typepad.com/marbury/2013/09/the-flight-from-the-centre.html0 -
Charles said:
Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.felix said:
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom
I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.
0 -
When PBTories scour Labour Uncut, things must be getting desperate for them.Scrapheap_as_was said:Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/0 -
Popcorn .....
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf0 -
Probably - but at the moment we are perpetuating an advantage in favour of one (asset light, foreign based) business model.JohnLilburne said:
Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.Charles said:I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more
I'd advocate taxes being universal, low and hard to avoid.0 -
why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?JohnLilburne said:
Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.Charles said:I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more
0 -
Surbysurbiton said:@Avery.
What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.
A few Labour myths need dispelling with facts.
1. Osborne inherited a growing economy in 2010 but it was growing at a lower rate than Germany's, that of the US, as well as the average EU27 and OECD growth rates.
2. Osborne did not "choke off growth by cutting too far and too fast". The profile of growth was broadly similar in all the comparator countries and regions: namely growth accelerating in 2010 following by rapid deceleration in 2011-12. Only Germany and the EU27 average suffered a "double dip" or "W" recession, although it is true the UK came very, very close to falling back into recession.
3. Over the course of 2012 H2 - 2013 H2, the UK's growth has accelerated faster than in the comparators.
4. The OECD (and almost all economic commentators) are forecasting that by the end of 2014 the UK will have a grown more over the 2010-2014 period than both Germany and the US, as well as the EU27 and OECD averages.
So under Gordon the UK fell to the bottom of the pile. Under George we have reached the top.
What more do you want, Surby? To overtake China?
0 -
Why? I've not really heard of it in my pbtory world, is it an anti-labour site????surbiton said:
When PBTories scour Labour Uncut, things must be getting desperate for them.Scrapheap_as_was said:Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/
0 -
(4) people don't want to buy nearly so much stuff from shops any more.Charles said:NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom
0 -
You do have a point. The question is how to legislate.Charles said:
Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.felix said:
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom
0 -
Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?FrancisUrquhart said:"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."
I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.
Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.
As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!
My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?0 -
Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.Scrapheap_as_was said:Popcorn .....
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf0 -
They are. And my argument is that internet only businesses should contribute to the business rate pot & the additional amount should be used to reduce to overall rate for everyone.felix said:Charles said:
Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.felix said:
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom
I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.0 -
Oh I don't know, terreur rogue might be just as right as terreur rouge.Sunil_Prasannan said:
"terreur rouge", Moniker.MonikerDiCanio said:Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-242408690 -
I'm still trying to work out how a business with razor thin margins can keep opening multi million pound warehouses and make massive investments in stock.Charles said:
Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?FrancisUrquhart said:"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."
I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.
Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.
As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!
My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?0 -
TSE won't be happy!
Man U 1-0 Liverpool in the League Cup...0 -
They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.Alanbrooke said:why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?
0 -
We won't know the real fall out of Milliband's speech until the weekend polls, IMO.
I suspect it's possible both Labour and Tories may get a boost - Labour, because cutting energy prices will obviously be popular (in theory anyway) and the Tories because the speech may be enough to bring a few of the less devoted UKIP'ers back to the Tories.
0 -
HMV is still alive and kicking, Charles.Charles said:
Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?
Sadly, the same can't be said of ModelZone0 -
Charles said:
They are. And my argument is that internet only businesses should contribute to the business rate pot & the additional amount should be used to reduce to overall rate for everyone.felix said:Charles said:
Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.felix said:
I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!Charles said:
Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathyanotherDave said:
Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.Charles said:
I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little moresurbiton said:
More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.Sunil_Prasannan said:Conservative Business Interests!
NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom
I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.
It sounds to me a rather 'canutian' response to the real world - I guess you'd want e-mails to be charged at that same rate as land letters.
0 -
keep up, our nom de plume is now 'pb hodges' ;-)Scrapheap_as_was said:
Why? I've not really heard of it in my pbtory world, is it an anti-labour site????0 -
Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!0
-
Oxford does PPE degress, Mr. Brooke.Alanbrooke said:
@Avery
totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.
When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?
But there is no reason to stop Manchester doing WCs.
0 -
Rouge rogue terreur ;Sunil_Prasannan said:
"terreur rouge", Moniker.MonikerDiCanio said:Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24273380
0 -
Clearly Bounce InvisibleNickPalmer said:If YouGov was really startling in any direction, we'd be getting Sun tweets by now - even if the results were unwelcome, the journalist's instincts would win.
0 -
Doesn't Luxemburg charge VAT on CDs then?Charles said:My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?
0 -
The Graun has a peculiar moderation policy. After deleting the first post, which "didn't abide by our community standards", the next two are "Piss off Peter" and "F*ck off you slimy bastard".felix said:
Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.Scrapheap_as_was said:Popcorn .....
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf
The latter two appear to "up to standard", leaving me very curious about that first post. What on earth could it have said?0 -
Charles: taxes low universal hard to avoid.
Absolutely!0 -
LOLAnorak said:
The Graun has a peculiar moderation policy. After deleting the first post, which "didn't abide by our community standards", the next two are "Piss off Peter" and "F*ck off you slimy bastard".felix said:
Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.Scrapheap_as_was said:Popcorn .....
Owen Jones@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf
The latter two appear to "up to standard", leaving me very curious about that first post. What on earth could it have said?0 -
Charles imo is simply stating the obvious, if the tax base were bigger becuause internet multi nats were paying their VAT in this country then rates and other taxes would be lower. These guys arguably haven't worked out a more efficient business model, merely a better tax scam.JohnLilburne said:
They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.Alanbrooke said:why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?
0 -
"Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?"
I apologize...I am multi-tasking here...Woolies especially had a lot of problems, not just Amazon stealing their market share in DVD's.
However, the internet via streaming, will seriously effect physical DVD market and in the both the US and here, Amazon don't have anywhere near a monopoly on that nor the replacement for the CD, music downloads / streaming.
Again, I'm not arguing about how they got to this stage, just that people always say well that Amazon they is making massive % returns, like Starbucks, Google, etc...when it isn't currently true.
They might have land grabbed a lot of the physical CD / DVD sector, but now that rug is being seriously plugged with all the music, tv and movie streaming services.0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2013/sep/25/energy-energy
Energy giants will blink first in Miliband's price freeze challenge.0 -
Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?Neil said:Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!
0 -
This is an argument for a common EU tax rate.Charles said:
Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?FrancisUrquhart said:"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."
I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.
Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.
As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!
My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?
0 -
He isn't stating the obvious - he wants companies that have no shops to pay rates on them - the ultimate in restrictive practices - the issue of where a company has its headquarters re corporation tax is a different matter.Alanbrooke said:
Charles imo is simply stating the obvious, if the tax base were bigger becuause internet multi nats were paying their VAT in this country then rates and other taxes would be lower. These guys arguably haven't worked out a more efficient business model, merely a better tax scam.JohnLilburne said:
They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.Alanbrooke said:why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?
0 -
HMV is still alive and kicking.FrancisUrquhart said:"Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?"
I apologize...I am multi-tasking here...Woolies especially had a lot of problems, not just Amazon stealing their market share in DVD's.
However, the internet via streaming, is killing physical CD / DVD sales full stop and in the both the US and here, Amazon don't have anywhere near a monopoly on that nor the replacement for the CD, music downloads etc.
Again, I'm not arguing about how they got to this stage, just that people always say well that Amazon they is making massive % returns, like Starbucks, Google, etc...when it isn't currently true.
http://www.hmv.com/store-locator/0 -
Terreur rouge rogue ( or rogue rouge I suppose). Adjectives follow the noun - well generally. ;-)MonikerDiCanio said:
Rouge rogue terreur ;Sunil_Prasannan said:
"terreur rouge", Moniker.MonikerDiCanio said:Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-242733800 -
PPE degress ? Is Oxford twinned with Allo Allo ?AveryLP said:
Oxford does PPE degress, Mr. Brooke.Alanbrooke said:
@Avery
totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.
When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?
But there is no reason to stop Manchester doing WCs.0 -
He joined at 4-1 down, so he endured a bad start, but since then, WOW.Tykejohnno said:
Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?Neil said:Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!
The kiwis must be gutted: a couple of races ago they were leading in light winds when the race was called off for not finishing in the allotted time. They were less than two minutes from the line...0 -
Lord Ashcroft must really does have a dislike for Cameron,after all the crap labour poured on this guy.
Lord Ashcroft tells Labour activists election is party's to lose
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-242287500 -
"Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?"
Remember Team USA started the event on "-2"....0 -
Not quite at 8-1 down but reminiscent enough of last year to make you wonder whether someone on the other team made the mistake of making him angryTykejohnno said:
Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?Neil said:Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!
0 -
Common EU tax rate: I'm sure the business ministers of Norway, Switzerland, Gibraltar, et al would agree enthusiastically if they can tear themselves away from popping the champagne corks at the thought of it.anotherDave said:
This is an argument for a common EU tax rate.Charles said:
Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?FrancisUrquhart said:"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."
I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.
Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.
As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!
My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?
0