politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at the 2010 CON voters whom Cameron has to win back

System · October 2013

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at the 2010 CON voters whom Cameron has to win back back

There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015 – those who voted Lib Dem in 2010 who now say they are voting LAB, and those who voted for Cameron’s Conservatives who now tell pollsters that they will vote UKIP.

Read the full story here

Tim_B · October 2013

First?

Ricardohos · October 2013

"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

More of the same old same old. It's axiomatic of simple minds to reduce complex situations to simplistic ones. Reductionism in all forms is invariably full of flaws, and none more so that pb.com's microcosmic psephology.

The GE2015 will NOT be decided by two groups. Sorry Mike. Baloney. Two groups from 2010 may be 'important' but there are scores of other groups who matter, from previous voters who this time won't bother to new voters, the elderly, migrants, expats, postal voters, HS2 residents, wind farm opponents, regional voters e.g. the post Scotland vote fallout etc. etc. etc. Broadly speaking they comprise 'floating voters' and there are millions of them, some of whom voted last time, some of whom didn't; and many of whom did vote either can't remember how they voted, or have forgotten.

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

More of the same old same old. It's axiomatic of simple minds to reduce complex situations to simplistic ones. Reductionism in all forms is invariably full of flaws, and none more so that pb.com's microcosmic psephology.

The GE2015 will NOT be decided by two groups. Sorry Mike. Baloney. Two groups from 2010 may be 'important' but there are scores of other groups who matter, from previous voters who this time won't bother to new voters, the elderly, migrants, expats, postal voters, HS2 residents, wind farm opponents, regional voters e.g. the post Scotland vote fallout etc. etc. etc. Broadly speaking they comprise 'floating voters' and there are millions of them, some of whom voted last time, some of whom didn't; and many of whom did vote either can't remember how they voted, or have forgotten.

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.

It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.

Ricardohos · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

More of the same old same old. It's axiomatic of simple minds to reduce complex situations to simplistic ones. Reductionism in all forms is invariably full of flaws, and none more so that pb.com's microcosmic psephology.

The GE2015 will NOT be decided by two groups. Sorry Mike. Baloney. Two groups from 2010 may be 'important' but there are scores of other groups who matter, from previous voters who this time won't bother to new voters, the elderly, migrants, expats, postal voters, HS2 residents, wind farm opponents, regional voters e.g. the post Scotland vote fallout etc. etc. etc. Broadly speaking they comprise 'floating voters' and there are millions of them, some of whom voted last time, some of whom didn't; and many of whom did vote either can't remember how they voted, or have forgotten.

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.

Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

More of the same old same old. It's axiomatic of simple minds to reduce complex situations to simplistic ones. Reductionism in all forms is invariably full of flaws, and none more so that pb.com's microcosmic psephology.

The GE2015 will NOT be decided by two groups. Sorry Mike. Baloney. Two groups from 2010 may be 'important' but there are scores of other groups who matter, from previous voters who this time won't bother to new voters, the elderly, migrants, expats, postal voters, HS2 residents, wind farm opponents, regional voters e.g. the post Scotland vote fallout etc. etc. etc. Broadly speaking they comprise 'floating voters' and there are millions of them, some of whom voted last time, some of whom didn't; and many of whom did vote either can't remember how they voted, or have forgotten.

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.
Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.

No, that's exactly what I'm not saying. I'm saying individuals vote differently from election to election, but that collectively the moves of individuals either:
a) Cancel each other out, eg last time Bob voted Lab but Dave had a headache, next time Dave votes Lab but Bob has a headache,
b) Add up to a detectable net change, in which case that change should show up at some point in the polling between elections.

CarlottaVance · October 2013

As OGH never (usually) tires of reminding us, the other issue is salience - yes, Candidate 1 may have better scores on Issue X than Candidate 2, but how important is Issue X?

Looking at the YouGov "Issues facing the Country/You/Your family" there are almost no significant differences between current and 2010 Conservatives. The only issue where there may be a difference is "Pensions" - with 2010 conservatives slightly more concerned (Country, 15 (+3), You/Your family 36 (+5)) Everything else is within one or two points between the two groups.

2010 Labour, on the other hand, show bigger differences vs current Labour:

2010 Labour (vs current)
Country:
Economy: 60 (-5)
Immigration: 45 (+7)

You/Your Family:
Pensions: 29 (+4)

There is also greater divergence between current & 2010 LibDems:

Country:
Immigration : 41 (+9)
Housing: 23 (+7)
Pensions: 16 (-4)

You/Your Family:
Health: 38 (+7)
Pensions: 24 (-11)
Immigration: 11 (+9)

Financier · October 2013

"Fuel prices will continue to soar, the Energy Secretary said yesterday – as he ruled out moves to cut punishing green taxes.

Ed Davey said there was no respite in sight for hard-pressed families struggling to pay their fuel bills, adding: ‘I think we will see more price rises.’

The Liberal Democrat minister said Britain was on the verge of agreeing a £50billion French and Chinese investment in new nuclear power, which is expected to drive bills even higher.

And he indicated the Lib Dems will try to block any attempt by David Cameron to reduce so-called green taxes."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458393/Energy-bills-rise-wont-cut-green-taxes--minister-Lib-Dem-defies-Cameron-plan-reduce-levies.html#ixzz2hfkUJN84
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Have the LDs booked Martin Day's yellow taxi for 2015?

OldKingCole · October 2013

The other group, surely are the non-voters. It seemed fairly clear in 97 that much of Major's difficulties were because a significant cohort of previous Con supporters just didn't vote. I know turnout tends to be lower in largely Labour voting areas, but it also looked as though, given that overall turnout fell many formerly Tory voters just didn't.
How many Kippers are to be found among the ranks of those who nowadays say a "plague on all your houses, but at last there's someone who ......."

Financier · October 2013

"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.

Blue_rog · October 2013

O/T

This just tickles me! This guy is brilliant at sticking his fingers up at the 'establishment'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/10376666/Banksy-sells-original-artworks-at-New-York-stall-for-37.html

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.

Alternatively maybe it shows that anchovy fishing in the Bay of Biscay needed regulating...

SouthamObserver · October 2013

OldKingCole said:
The other group, surely are the non-voters. It seemed fairly clear in 97 that much of Major's difficulties were because a significant cohort of previous Con supporters just didn't vote. I know turnout tends to be lower in largely Labour voting areas, but it also looked as though, given that overall turnout fell many formerly Tory voters just didn't.
How many Kippers are to be found among the ranks of those who nowadays say a "plague on all your houses, but at last there's someone who ......."

The Tories have been polling in the low 30s at a time when UKIP has been polling in the low teens. This indicates that the overall right-wing pool has increased since the GE. But if you compare the right wing vote now to where it stood this time during the last Parliament it may well be pretty similar, only much more Tory-centric. If that is the case, it does indicate that the right has a problem in persuading its full cohort of support to go to the polls. So perhaps the Tories' best hope in 2015 is a higher turnout. In fact, not only should the Tories support AV, they should also be looking for ways to make postal voting easier. As we know, it's the elderly - one of the strongest Tory demographics - who use it most.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

tim said:

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.
Alternatively maybe it shows that anchovy fishing in the Bay of Biscay needed regulating...

There's an annual quota based on anchovy stocks which changes....annually.

3600 regulations in 3 years in a very diverse single market including lots of obscure, complicated industries across a continent of 500 million people seems like a suspiciously low number.

OldKingCole · October 2013

SouthamObserver said:

OldKingCole said:
The other group, surely are the non-voters. It seemed fairly clear in 97 that much of Major's difficulties were because a significant cohort of previous Con supporters just didn't vote. I know turnout tends to be lower in largely Labour voting areas, but it also looked as though, given that overall turnout fell many formerly Tory voters just didn't.
How many Kippers are to be found among the ranks of those who nowadays say a "plague on all your houses, but at last there's someone who ......."

The Tories have been polling in the low 30s at a time when UKIP has been polling in the low teens. This indicates that the overall right-wing pool has increased since the GE. But if you compare the right wing vote now to where it stood this time during the last Parliament it may well be pretty similar, only much more Tory-centric. If that is the case, it does indicate that the right has a problem in persuading its full cohort of support to go to the polls. So perhaps the Tories' best hope in 2015 is a higher turnout. In fact, not only should the Tories support AV, they should also be looking for ways to make postal voting easier. As we know, it's the elderly - one of the strongest Tory demographics - who use it most.

Not disbelieving re postal voting , Mr SO, but slightly surprised. Do we have a breakdown which shows that? When voting hours were extended some years ago it was to enable "working people" ..... they weren't universally described as "hard-working" in those days ..... to have more opportunity to vote.

DavidL · October 2013

The driving force behind tory voters in 2010 was the apprehension that the country was going over a cliff on the road to economic ruin. The bald warnings of cuts etc given by Osborne and Cameron may have lost some votes from those who feared the consequences but it was successful in mobilising those who think that government debt is important.

That group inevitably contains many who think that the government has not done enough. They are currently disillusioned and some are tempted by UKIP. But look at the tiny numbers who have switched to Labour or the Lib Dems. No one who is still concerned about government borrowing will move to those parties.

If government borrowing and the urgent need to cut the deficit remains such an issue at the next election then the 2010 Conservatives will return to stop the financial incompetents taking charge. The risk for the tories is that the sense of national risk will not be as great. Borrowing will nearly have halved by the time of the election and other factors, such as Europe and immigration, have greater saliance.

Osborne must keep focussed on the debt. His recent speech emphasising the elimination of the deficit is only a staging post with debt repayment thereafter is the correct policy, not only for the country but for the Coalition of voters that put the tories in power. Expect several more such speeches emphasising how much is still to be done in deficit reduction, how the state must shrink and plans for longer term economic stability.

DecrepitJohnL · October 2013

OldKingCole said:
The other group, surely are the non-voters. It seemed fairly clear in 97 that much of Major's difficulties were because a significant cohort of previous Con supporters just didn't vote.

Conservative supporters had felt besieged from two directions, with Ken Clarke a serial offender in alienating public sector voters, and then general economic policy. Doctors and the police, for instance, who could normally be relied on, had their pay and conditions attacked by Clarke, while high interest rates and falling house prices trapped many middle class voters in negative equity.

And that is betting without the catastrophic decline in Scottish Conservative fortunes under Thatcher and Major. From two dozen MPs to one dozen to none at all (since restored to the giddy heights of, erm, one). Maybe using Scotland as a guinea pig for unpopular policies was not as clever a wheeze as it first seemed.

SouthamObserver · October 2013

"The bald warnings of cuts"

What were these warnings? I remember no rise in VAT, no rise in employee NI contributions, no plans to end universal benefits and claims that a lot of savings would be made by focusing on wasteful spending, but I don't remember much talk of cuts.

DavidL · October 2013

tim said:
@DavidL

According to the OBR borrowing will rise this year as will spending

Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last? As it has been for every year of the Parliament?

As Avery has pointed out endless times spending is falling in real terms if not in nominal terms. But as I said many who supported the tories in 2010 think more should have been done in that direction and I am one of them.

Millsy · October 2013

Just as important as those two big groups (current Ukip and former LD) - the "disenfranchised" right and left - is the bigger group of people that don't bother to vote for anyone, even one of those protest alternatives. With turnout at the last 3 elections at 65% or less that's 35% of the electorate that couldn't be bothered with any parties that were on offer. With Ed going left and Dave going right, and leaving the mushy centre to the Lib Dems, some of these people might actually like what they see!

Plato · October 2013

I see Unite has just received a £2.3m tax bill for breaking HRMC VAT rules - very naughty boys, failing to pay what they demand others do. This is all becoming bit of a pattern for the vocal left.

POUWAS

Blue_rog · October 2013

I'm of the firm belief that although there is a lot of grumbling amongst the right, the large majority of right wing voters know that the Conservatives are the only party who

a) have any realistic chance of being in power.
b) know how to turn round an economy and improve the Country's finances.
c) have a full spectrum policy approach.
d) believe in individual aspiration rather than state led initiatives.

I also feel that the slow and almost hesitant approach of the coalition is recognised as being a result of the coalition and that unpalatable (for the right) choices are part of sharing power with a non aligned party.

If the Tories have a strong message going into GE 2015 and can convince people that they can deliver if in power by themselves, then they have a good chance of winning back the drifters, and encouraging the stay at homes to come out and vote.

I also feel that part of the strong message should be a commitment to try a minority Government if they don't have an outright majority, although this may be sotto voce to stop scaring the horses.

Financier · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

tim said:

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.
Alternatively maybe it shows that anchovy fishing in the Bay of Biscay needed regulating...

There's an annual quota based on anchovy stocks which changes....annually.
3600 regulations in 3 years in a very diverse single market including lots of obscure, complicated industries across a continent of 500 million people seems like a suspiciously low number.

That shows a statist mentality. Europe has too many people organising other people who organise other people, who organise the wealth creators. We just need more wealth creators and fewer organisers.

JackW · October 2013

Latest ARSE 2015 General Election Projection :

Countdown - 1 day 1 hour 1 minute

DecrepitJohnL · October 2013

tim said:
How many narratives has this bloke had in the last week?

@DPJHodges: Labour lurches back to the centre > Telegraph > http://t.co/SjABDzbVbt

Well, to be fair, Hodges has been pretty sure each of the developments he miscalled was a disaster for Ed Miliband.

JackW · October 2013

MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?

OldKingCole · October 2013

Millsy said:
Just as important as those two big groups (current Ukip and former LD) - the "disenfranchised" right and left - is the bigger group of people that don't bother to vote for anyone, even one of those protest alternatives. With turnout at the last 3 elections at 65% or less that's 35% of the electorate that couldn't be bothered with any parties that were on offer. With Ed going left and Dave going right, and leaving the mushy centre to the Lib Dems, some of these people might actually like what they see!

Trouble is, Millsy, the non-voters comprise quite a wide range. Some of them are those who see no point in stirring themselves, since "round here" Labour (especially) will always win. Some are vague sort of anarchists who have somehow got on the register but "don't vote, it only encourages them". Some are making a genuine protest because "round here there's no-one anywhere near my views!" Or "they are all the same"!

It's notable that in N Ireland, where very often people care very deeply turnouts are much higher, and in spite of suggestions about questionable practices, such as voting early and often, I suspect that these figures are genuine.

Financier · October 2013

"It will be a "disaster" for Wales if borrowing powers recommended by the Silk Commission are not devolved, First Minister Carwyn Jones has warned.

He told BBC Radio Wales' Sunday Supplement that without more powers to borrow money, planned £1bn M4 improvements "will not happen".

Mr Jones will raise his concerns with the UK Government in Downing Street later this week.....

Almost a year ago, the commission set up by the UK government and chaired by former assembly clerk Paul Silk, said ministers in Cardiff should be given the power to vary some tax rates.

A decision had been initially expected in the spring.

The first minister was asked if he thought that the Silk recommendations had been permanently kicked into the long grass.

Mr Jones said: "It'd be far better for everybody if they were simply to say - yes we'll accept the Silk recommendations, we can all move on."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-24508756

It will be a disaster for Wales if HMG let Carwyn Jones anywhere near uncontrolled purse strings. Welsh Labour is profligate and has spent over £60m on a loss-making airport that requires an equal or greater sum in infrastructure to make it even a feasible airport, then he can find an equal or greater amount for the M4 improvement that need not cost £1bn.

Carwyn's latest hobby is leading trade missions (he knows nothing about trade) to warm climates and he wants to do that from a Welsh airport. It is a bit like Wales' obesity problem - enlarging their stomachs to fit their unsustainable appetite.

JohnO · October 2013

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?

If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Financier, devolution of borrowing rights (to Wale sor Scotland) is a major issue. It cannot be the case that English taxpayers are on the hook for spending/borrowing commitments other parts of the UK make and over which the English have no say.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Financier said:

edmundintokyo said:

tim said:

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.
Alternatively maybe it shows that anchovy fishing in the Bay of Biscay needed regulating...

There's an annual quota based on anchovy stocks which changes....annually.
3600 regulations in 3 years in a very diverse single market including lots of obscure, complicated industries across a continent of 500 million people seems like a suspiciously low number.
That shows a statist mentality. Europe has too many people organising other people who organise other people, who organise the wealth creators. We just need more wealth creators and fewer organisers.

You don't measure the regulatory burden by counting the regulations.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.

Try removing the number from the URL, eg if you have www1 change it to www. PB seems to have an eccentric setup where when things get moved between servers it's done by changing the URL, so you may be getting an old version or something.

JackW · October 2013

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.

Thanks to Hersham's Finest for that.

However the computer I use for PB is not Firefox enabled. Curious.

I wonder how many old and new users PB is losing because of this fault ?

JohnO · October 2013

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?

You know what....I am happy to take that bet if you like. I'm right that this is measured April to April?

DecrepitJohnL · October 2013

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.

I do not have this problem with Firefox. Are you picking up the mobile site, perhaps? (Rather begging the question of whether there is a mobile version of the site.)

AveryLP · October 2013

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?

Any available for me, tim?

We would need to nail down the definition of "deficit" first though.

Financier · October 2013

Morris_Dancer said:
Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Financier, devolution of borrowing rights (to Wale sor Scotland) is a major issue. It cannot be the case that English taxpayers are on the hook for spending/borrowing commitments other parts of the UK make and over which the English have no say.

@Morris_Dancer

In one way I agree with your thought, but it would still be a disaster for the Welsh inhabitants if Welsh Labour had such borrowing rights. They have already frittered away hundreds of millions of EU money with virtually nothing to show for it, very unlike the way that Spain, Ireland and Portugal have used similar money and improved their infrastructure.

BTW many thanks for your F1 insights over the weekend - turned out to be a very interesting race - how much should we learn from that circuit for future circuits?

JohnO · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.
Try removing the number from the URL, eg if you have www1 change it to www. PB seems to have an eccentric setup where when things get moved between servers it's done by changing the URL, so you may be getting an old version or something.

Many many thanks - I'll try that; might assist baffled old hack!

Financier · October 2013

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.

Do not have the same problem - are you using the latest edition of Firefox?

Ricardohos · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.
Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.
No, that's exactly what I'm not saying. I'm saying individuals vote differently from election to election, but that collectively the moves of individuals either:
a) Cancel each other out, eg last time Bob voted Lab but Dave had a headache, next time Dave votes Lab but Bob has a headache,
b) Add up to a detectable net change, in which case that change should show up at some point in the polling between elections.

This approach is turning into a farce, I suspect because now we have fixed 5 year terms politics is intensely boring, well even more so than normal, and Mike has little better to post about (which is a pity because Guido manages it). You just can't be this simplistic. There's such a gaping hole in your b) that you could drive a psephological coach and horses through it. Polling is not the same as voting, and polling between elections the more so.

I'm not against trying to be scientific about this but there's a difference between being analytical and drawing false conclusions, with wild assumptions. If you fire a rocket to the moon and start out a millimetre wrong it will miss by thousands of miles. And I'm afraid Mike's approach is sailing off out into space instead of landing on the surface.

JohnO · October 2013

Financier said:

JohnO said:

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?
If you're accessing via Firefox on a laptop, a number of us, including Hersham's finest, are having the same problem. To get round it, you either have to empty the cache at least once a day or once on pb, click on the archive at the top right hand side and then on the latest thread.

Only Firefox seems to be affected since the last round of vanilla changes.
Do not have the same problem - are you using the latest edition of Firefox?

Yes...and my other laptop, also using Firefox, continues to access the site perfectly. I'll try EiT's suggestion: he knows what he's talking about!!

Financier · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:

edmundintokyo said:

tim said:

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.
That shows a statist mentality. Europe has too many people organising other people who organise other people, who organise the wealth creators. We just need more wealth creators and fewer organisers.
You don't measure the regulatory burden by counting the regulations.
So you disagree with my premis that we need fewer organisers and more wealth creators?

malcolmg · October 2013

Morris_Dancer said:
Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Financier, devolution of borrowing rights (to Wale sor Scotland) is a major issue. It cannot be the case that English taxpayers are on the hook for spending/borrowing commitments other parts of the UK make and over which the English have no say.

Morris , that old canard , how do you explain us paying in more than we receive every year, English taxpayers robbing us or is it perfectly acceptable that way round

R0berts · October 2013

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.
Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.
No, that's exactly what I'm not saying. I'm saying individuals vote differently from election to election, but that collectively the moves of individuals either:
a) Cancel each other out, eg last time Bob voted Lab but Dave had a headache, next time Dave votes Lab but Bob has a headache,
b) Add up to a detectable net change, in which case that change should show up at some point in the polling between elections.
Mike has little better to post about (which is a pity because Guido manages it). .

Ha. Speak for yourself. But I suspect most PB readers wouldn't agree with you that Guido's ridiculous blog is more engaging than the analyses you get on PB.

And if you really think that, there's an obvious solution available to you.

Plato · October 2013

R0berts said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.
Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.

Mike has little better to post about (which is a pity because Guido manages it). .
Ha. Speak for yourself. But I suspect most PB readers wouldn't agree with you that Guido's ridiculous blog is more engaging than the analyses you get on PB.

And if you really think that, there's an obvious solution available to you.

Whatever your opinion - Guido has a remarkably successful blog

RT @GuidoFawkes: Up: 134,289 visitors visited 383,647 times viewing 661,473 pages this week. The top stories 7 were guyfawk.es/187oRq8

And 117k followers on Twitter.

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Mr. Financier, thanks.

Not so much. Four races left: India, Abu Dhabi, America and Brazil.

India is probably the worst of the lot. Slow, hard to overtake and festooned with limp-wristed, bedwetting run-off areas. I'll check the safety car record beforehand, as that might be an area of interest. Abu Dhabi is slightly less terrible. It's also a slow, stop-start circuit (whereas Japan is fast and free-flowing) but has some close barriers.

The circuits in America and Brazil are a bit different. Only been to America the once, but from memory the circuit does have some fast-flowing sections (mostly sector 1, I think), so Japan might be a fairly useful guide. Interlagos, perhaps counter-intuitively, is actually a pretty slow (and narrow) circuit but is nevertheless fantastic.

The biggest thing to take from Japan is that teams are going to be doing almost no work on their 2013 cars unless such upgrades also have an impact for 2014. There's a tight battle (save the winning slot) in the Constructors, but the rule changes for next year are massive, and if you fall behind from the start that could prevent a team from winning a title it otherwise would've gotten.

So, I expect the status quo to more or less be maintained throughout the season. Red Bull top dog, Mercedes inexplicably going backwards from the grid, Sauber hard to pass (incidentally, the traction and high top speed of the Sauber should, apparently, really help in India), Lotus pretty good etc.

In fact, I think Sauber may have a chance of overhauling Force India. In the last 4 races Sauber have gained 38 points, whereas Force India have acquired 1. Force India are on 62 points, Sauber 45. Given the start of the season they suffered, that would be a fantastic result for the Swiss team.

Apologies for the enormo-answer, but I was just looking at this when you asked the question.

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Mr. G, don't many places pay in more than they get out? That doesn't legitimise (in a moral sense) the right to borrow what you like knowing someone else will pick up the bill if everything goes wrong.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Financier said:

So you disagree with my premis that we need fewer organisers and more wealth creators?

It's probably right for government overall, but probably not for the EU, which just doesn't have a lot of guys.

As an example, people trying to start businesses related to bitcoin in the EU currently have the problem that the VAT status is unclear. Poland seem to think that if you sell bitcoins you have to charge VAT on the bitcoins. Germany seemed to think the same, then as of last week thought something different. The EU tried to clear up the status of electronic money before, but understandably they didn't see decentralized virtual currencies coming, so their definition may not fit. What we really need is for the EU to take a look at this and issue a few pages of the kind of rules that are upsetting the Mail so that people know where they stand.

Of course what would be even easier for entrepreneurs would be if there was no such thing as taxation in the first place so there was no need for any rules that anybody had to interpret, but that would have a cost in terms government funding for useful services like the armies that keep the EU safe from the Icelandic hoards.

R0berts · October 2013

Plato said:

R0berts said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:

edmundintokyo said:

Ricardohos said:
"There are two groups voters who will decide GE2015"

Pin it all on two groups as you wish but it's erroneous.
It's not enough for those groups to exist, they need to move between different parties or voting and not-voting in a way that doesn't cancel out. It's true that there tends to be a fair bit of churn at the individual level between elections, but if there's a serious amount of net churn between different groups as a whole there should be some evidence for it.
Massive assumptions here that the same people vote from election to election. They don't.

Mike has little better to post about (which is a pity because Guido manages it). .
Ha. Speak for yourself. But I suspect most PB readers wouldn't agree with you that Guido's ridiculous blog is more engaging than the analyses you get on PB.

And if you really think that, there's an obvious solution available to you.
Whatever your opinion - Guido has a remarkably successful blog

.

I don't doubt it.

There's no shortage of a market for complete trash.

CarlottaVance · October 2013

"Since Miliband’s speech, the wider UK electricity and gas sector has suffered a 5.4 per cent fall in stock prices, whereas the same sector in Europe (ex-UK) is up around five per cent, implying a 10.4 per cent swing. Looking just at Britain’s SSE and Centrica versus Germany’s RWE and E.On since the speech, the swing ranges from 14 per cent to 17 per cent in favour of the latter. SSE and Centrica have lost seven per cent and six per cent of their value respectively against the FTSE 100 – a combined £3bn hit to their market cap relative to the market. -

See more at: http://www.cityam.com/article/1381721764/miliband-s-policies-have-already-damaged-britain-s-economy#sthash.daiZSILR.Dy8KBUs1.dpuf

TGOHF · October 2013

Plato said:
I see Unite has just received a £2.3m tax bill for breaking HRMC VAT rules - very naughty boys, failing to pay what they demand others do. This is all becoming bit of a pattern for the vocal left.

POUWAS

Oh dear.

Plato · October 2013

Oh poor bugger

"Before he boarded the plane, 37stone Les Price had already been forced to pay for an extra ticket.

The airline’s rules for passengers weighing more than 20stone required him to buy two seats for himself.

But when he got on board, insult was added to injury. For a dismayed Mr Price found his seats for the flight to Ireland were not even next to each other – they were either side of another traveller’s seat. And on his return journey the situation was even more farcical, with his allocated places two rows apart.

Mr Price, 43, had booked his tickets in advance of the flight.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2457971/37-stone-man-told-buy-2-airline-seats-given-separate-rows.html#ixzz2hgHXUebI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

CD13 · October 2013

Off-topic, but this Owen Paterson bloke isn't all daft.

"Mr Paterson told the newspaper: "It's just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology."

Vitamin A-enriched rice, or "golden rice" would be a real breakthrough. When I worked for a large pharmaceutical firm, I asked why, when we manufactured tons of vitamin A, children in the third world were being doomed to a life of blindness. Then problem was the usual combination of transport problems and national regulations.

Now this rice is being opposed by the usual combination of middle-class, clueless, know-it-alls who give Tarquin a little protest banner to wave. I suspect the homeopaths are opposing it too (that's for tim).

But the footballing badger is now forgiven.

CarlottaVance · October 2013

TGOHF said:

Plato said:
I see Unite has just received a £2.3m tax bill for breaking HRMC VAT rules - very naughty boys, failing to pay what they demand others do. This is all becoming bit of a pattern for the vocal left.

POUWAS
Oh dear.

In fairness: Margaret Hodge commented: "They should pay and they should pay promptly. It is very disappointing that Unite is talking the talk, not walking the walk."

nigel4england · October 2013

As a UKIP supporter the election is not a matter between Labour, Lib Dem or Conservative.

It is a straightforward choice, Common Sense v Common Purpose

edmundintokyo · October 2013

CarlottaVance said:
"Since Miliband’s speech, the wider UK electricity and gas sector has suffered a 5.4 per cent fall in stock prices, whereas the same sector in Europe (ex-UK) is up around five per cent, implying a 10.4 per cent swing. Looking just at Britain’s SSE and Centrica versus Germany’s RWE and E.On since the speech, the swing ranges from 14 per cent to 17 per cent in favour of the latter. SSE and Centrica have lost seven per cent and six per cent of their value respectively against the FTSE 100 – a combined £3bn hit to their market cap relative to the market. -

See more at: http://www.cityam.com/article/1381721764/miliband-s-policies-have-already-damaged-britain-s-economy#sthash.daiZSILR.Dy8KBUs1.dpuf

That bloke seems a bit useless. He's totally missed the policy, and instead focussed on the short-term gimmick designed to distract from the policy. The actual policy is to ditch the Blair adminstration's competition regime and go back to something closer to the Major administration's one, which is supposed to make it easier for new entrants to compete with the big firms. If this works it'll obviously hurt the current incumbents.

Plato · October 2013

There's some excellent comment on Golden Rice - I didn't know much about it until very recently and have been amazed that some Luddites are trying to block it.

CD13 said:

Off-topic, but this Owen Paterson bloke isn't all daft.

"Mr Paterson told the newspaper: "It's just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology."

Vitamin A-enriched rice, or "golden rice" would be a real breakthrough. When I worked for a large pharmaceutical firm, I asked why, when we manufactured tons of vitamin A, children in the third world were being doomed to a life of blindness. Then problem was the usual combination of transport problems and national regulations.

Now this rice is being opposed by the usual combination of middle-class, clueless, know-it-alls who give Tarquin a little protest banner to wave. I suspect the homeopaths are opposing it too (that's for tim).

But the footballing badger is now forgiven.

AveryLP · October 2013

tim said:

AveryLP said:

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?
Any available for me, tim?

We would need to nail down the definition of "deficit" first though.

OBR definition of govt borrowing

You get a specially tailored Yellow Box bet

£25 on increased spending
£25 on increased deficit

Here are the OBR PSNB stats from their commentary on the ONS August Public Finances Release. The figures come from the final table "Public sector receipts, expenditure and net borrowing".

                               2013-14   2012-13
                               Mar EFO   Outturn

Public sector net borrowing     107.7      81.3 
PSNB (ex. Royal Mail)           107.7     109.2 
PSNB (ex. Royal Mail and APF)   119.8     115.7

You need to pick the line you want. The last is the line most often discussed in the media but considerations should be given to how the ONS and Treasury decide to treat receipts from the Royal Mail flotation and the sale of Lloyds shares.

Also the figures quoted by Chote are nominal. A proper comparison of this year's PSNB versus last should be in real terms.

On spending the real vs. nominal is even more important. The budget for Total Managed Expenditure (TME) this year is £720.0 bn in nominal terms and £703.9 bn in real terms (2012-13 June values using ONS deflators released 27 June). Comparative figures for the 2012-13 fiscal year are £675.3 bn (nominal & real).

So your bet against increased spending would imply an undershoot on budget of £44.7 bn (nominal) or £28.6 bn in real terms: or a 6.21% reduction (nominal).

I do think TME will undershoot budget this year but not by over 6%, so no bet here on offered terms.

I am still open to a bet on PSNB once we can fix the details.

TwistedFireStopper · October 2013

Sky News going big on immigration this week. They have a poll saying that 67% believe the UK population is too large, and the government should take "drastic" action to reduce immigration.

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Mr. England, that sentiment only matters in seats where you stand a chance of winning.

UKIP's strategic idiocy in pursuing a broad but shallow level of support has robbed them of a realistic chance of winning seats, and, at this stage, there seems to be no change there. If you win seats at the General Election it would be in spite of the party's electoral strategy rather than because of it.

I agree with the basic sentiment of UKIP (let's leave the EU), but unless you have a chance of winning there's no point me voting for you (especially in this seat, which is essentially Balls vs the Conservatives).

rcs1000 · October 2013

Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks

edmundintokyo · October 2013

Taleb is worth reading on GMO. I don't think I agree, but it's a serious argument rather than luddite-bonkers.

http://longplayer.org/what/whatelse/letters.php

rcs1000 · October 2013

(Owen Patterson is a new hero of mine.)

Charles · October 2013

SouthamObserver said:
In fact, not only should the Tories support AV, they should also be looking for ways to make postal voting easier. As we know, it's the elderly - one of the strongest Tory demographics - who use it most.

That's a fallacy, SO

I haven't checked, but before the rules were loosened, I suspect that an *even higher proportion* of postal voters were used by the sick and elderly. After all: that is what they are there for: people who can't make it to the polls for a very good reason.

If the rules are tightened, I suspect it will be the sick and elderly who are allowed to continue using them

But it would be interesting if anyone had data on how the mix of PVs changed pre and post the rules change. Otherwise you are just relying on a single data point

Charles · October 2013

tim said:
@DavidL

According to the OBR borrowing will rise this year as will spending

And given their track record...

Charles · October 2013

JackW said:
MODERATORS

Dear Sir/Madam

I'm still getting the Dacre thread from a few days back when logging on to PB. Are others noting this technical problem or is this now a peculiar feature afflicting the impoverished Scottish nobility of a certain vintage ?

May be you should sell your newspaper?

AndyJS · October 2013

Vicky Pryce lashes out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24516626

Bobajob · October 2013

tim said:

rcs1000 said:
Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks
I've logged in on Chrome and am getting a different Dan Hodges story every day with the same conclusion.
How do I fix it?

Have you tried switching Hodges on and off again?

Charles · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:

edmundintokyo said:

tim said:

edmundintokyo said:

Financier said:
"The European Union’s ‘addiction’ to red tape was laid bare yesterday.

Since the 2010 general election Brussels has handed down almost 3,600 pieces of new regulation and directives affecting British businesses.

A campaign group said last night that the 13million words contained in the deluge of bureaucracy would take more than 92 days to read in all."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2458354/3-600-new-laws-years-EU-strangles-UK-firms-Brusselss-addiction-red-tape-laid-bare-revealed-92-DAYS-read-regulations.html#ixzz2hflgUMGWok

Just shows that when a bureaucracy is created, it will create unnecessary work to fill its idle time.
Alternatively maybe it shows that anchovy fishing in the Bay of Biscay needed regulating...

There's an annual quota based on anchovy stocks which changes....annually.
3600 regulations in 3 years in a very diverse single market including lots of obscure, complicated industries across a continent of 500 million people seems like a suspiciously low number.
That shows a statist mentality. Europe has too many people organising other people who organise other people, who organise the wealth creators. We just need more wealth creators and fewer organisers.

You don't measure the regulatory burden by counting the regulations.

As an example: "Regulation 1: You shall do nothing without permission of edmundintokyo, the Lord High Regulator"

would impose a high regulatory burden, but wouldn't have many words, regulations or regulators

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Mr. JS, although it's dated today I'm sure I read a story along the same lines some time ago.

Anyway, it's pathetic and ridiculous to claim that women in prison are there just because of men. Women cannot claim equality when it comes to pay and opportunities, and then claim an evil nasty man made them do bad things when it comes to crime.

Charles · October 2013

JohnO said:

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?
You know what....I am happy to take that bet if you like. I'm right that this is measured April to April?

I'd go for that as well, subject to getting the definition of deficit nailed down

taffys · October 2013

Great to see Ed Davey coming out fighting on the topic of green taxes and higher energy bills today.

Great for us conservatives in lib/con marginals that is.

As I said to Mark Senior yesterday, to the type of shrill and insulting response you often get from a lib dem when the light is shone on one of their policies, good luck with that on the doorstep.

MikeK · October 2013

The real question to put to the thread is: which party would leave the EU if elected to government? And the only answer is UKIP.

Plato · October 2013

TwistedFireStopper said:
Sky News going big on immigration this week. They have a poll saying that 67% believe the UK population is too large, and the government should take "drastic" action to reduce immigration.

A BBC poll this Sunday had 95% saying they agreed with the EDL having a legitimate voice that should be listened to - and 2/3rds in a BBC ICM have people saying services haven't been hurt by cuts.

There's quite a lot of interesting opinion out there. A sneery STimes intv with Tommy Robinson was totally hammered in the comments. It was very one-sided, but I was surprised at the sympathy he got.

R0berts · October 2013

Bobajob said:

tim said:

rcs1000 said:
Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks
I've logged in on Chrome and am getting a different Dan Hodges story every day with the same conclusion.
How do I fix it?

Have you tried switching Hodges on and off again?

*Error. Hodges was unexpectedly shut down. Do you want to open it in Safe mode?*

taffys · October 2013

That's a fallacy, SO

Of course its a fallacy, because labour voted against tightening the postal vote rules.

Plato · October 2013

taffys said:
Great to see Ed Davey coming out fighting on the topic of green taxes and higher energy bills today.

Great for us conservatives in lib/con marginals that is.

As I said to Mark Senior yesterday, to the type of shrill and insulting response you often get from a lib dem when the light is shone on one of their policies, good luck with that on the doorstep.

I thought Ed Davey sacrificed himself on the altar of Green Taxes most selflessly. I hope he continues to do so.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

j

MikeK said:
The real question to put to the thread is: which party would leave the EU if elected to government? And the only answer is UKIP.

Don't you think they'd have a referendum on it? That's a serious question - referendums are a good thing to push when your case is otherwise hopeless, but now their best bet would be to get people who agree with them elected and just do what they think is right without giving the voters a chance to stop them.

Bobajob · October 2013

DecrepitJohnL said:

tim said:
How many narratives has this bloke had in the last week?

@DPJHodges: Labour lurches back to the centre > Telegraph > http://t.co/SjABDzbVbt
Well, to be fair, Hodges has been pretty sure each of the developments he miscalled was a disaster for Ed Miliband.

Hodges' story tomorrow is his Ed's abandonment of the left spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.

Bobajob · October 2013

Hodges' story tomorrow is how Ed's abandonment of the left spells certain disaster for Ed Miliband.

Morris_Dancer · October 2013

Miss Plato, it's perhaps because of the truncated (and therefore false) approach to freedom taken recently.

Want to wear a veil? That's your choice, this is a free society.

Want to march with placards declaring "Death to the West"? We'll let it go ahead.

Whereas, EDL marches are heavily policed and the Danish cartoons were shown nowhere.

Neither set of marches are acceptable, and I believe the cartoons should've been shown, and veils are acceptable with certain exceptions. But freedom only tilts one way. So people are frustrated, and if they try and air a view that is not considered acceptable they're often ignored or called racist (we saw this with Labour's despicable immigration ploy). A head of steam builds up and people want somewhere to express views that the political mainstream don't accept, which may well explain UKIP's rise and the resilience of its support.

UKIP, a top tip: draft a very simple, easily understandably and broad law guaranteeing freedom of speech. The right to criticise, ridicule and mock has been reduced recently, with the rise of the stupid "I am offended" counter-argument, and must be reinforced.

Bobajob · October 2013

tim said:

Bobajob said:

tim said:

rcs1000 said:
Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks
I've logged in on Chrome and am getting a different Dan Hodges story every day with the same conclusion.
How do I fix it?

Have you tried switching Hodges on and off again?

I turned him off at the wall and back on again.
When I turned him off the lurch to the left was showing as bad news for Ed Miliband.
When I turned him back on again the lurch to the centre was bad for Ed Miliband.

I think I may have to phone customer services.

There's a workaround to avoid endless menus - enter on your keypad 2-5-4, you'll get straight through to Hodges. Once there you will be given three options - all of them a disaster for Ed Miliband.

taffys · October 2013

Good piece on Tory immigration hypocrisy

I don't think there's a sensible voter in the land who doesn't think some types of immigration aren't good for the country.

I reckon what voters want is a far, far better system for rewarding the good and deterring the bad. Any party that says basically we have to take the rough with the smooth will be punished at the ballot box, in my view.

JonathanD · October 2013

Charles said:

JohnO said:

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?
You know what....I am happy to take that bet if you like. I'm right that this is measured April to April?
I'd go for that as well, subject to getting the definition of deficit nailed down

Given tim's comments the other day, when the OBR's analysis of the contributions to growth report was published, I'd guess he is going on the PSNB ex RM ex APTF figure, so

2009/10 - £157bn
2010/11 - £139bn
2011/12 - £118bn
2012/13 - £116bn
2013/14 - £120bn ( OBR March Forecast)

Bobajob · October 2013

@Plato, Taffys

This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

NickPalmer · October 2013

Charles said:

But it would be interesting if anyone had data on how the mix of PVs changed pre and post the rules change. Otherwise you are just relying on a single data point

All the parties, especially the Conservatives, have worked hard at getting voters to switch to PVs, since PVs undeniably have a higher propensity to vote (though it's quite possible that this is partly because they do have more older folk who are more liable to vote anyway). It's clearly easier than voting on the day and people who trouble to sign up for it are probably quite motivated. What is not, however, clear, is whetyher these motivated folk wouldn't trudge down to the polling station anyway if they had to. So it's hard to be sure of the effect.

rcs1000 said:
Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks

I use Firefox and always get whatever I last looked at - which is fine as I can catch up on any responses there. A refresh gets me the current page.

CD13 said:

Vitamin A-enriched rice, or "golden rice" would be a real breakthrough. When I worked for a large pharmaceutical firm, I asked why, when we manufactured tons of vitamin A, children in the third world were being doomed to a life of blindness. Then problem was the usual combination of transport problems and national regulations.

Now this rice is being opposed by the usual combination of middle-class, clueless, know-it-alls who give Tarquin a little protest banner to wave. I suspect the homeopaths are opposing it too (that's for tim).

Interesting, thanks. There's a good summary I googled of the pros and cons here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
- based on this, I'm leaning pro. But then I also support the fluoridation of water in Britain, for exactly the same reasons. Government action to make food and drink healthier, yes! Pleased to see Owen Paterosn join us statists.

TGOHF · October 2013

Problem with borrowing bets is that the final total will be heavily revised over the next 2+ years - possibly quite significantly.

Already last yea's borrowing was down, up and down again.

Slackbladder · October 2013

Seems the PB Kinnocks have a even greater fasciation with Mr Hodges... ho hum..

DavidL · October 2013

tim said:
@DavidL

"Would you like a bet that the outcome for this year is a lower deficit than last?"

Yes please, £50 at evens?

Sorry had to get to work. One of the problems with public sector borrowing is the multiplicity of different definitions. This is taken from the OBR publication in August:

"•In 2012/13, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions and also excluding the effects of the transfer of the Royal Mail Pension Plan and the transfers from the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility Fund was £116.5 billion. This was £2.0 billion lower than in 2011/12."

So the bet would be that the public sector borrowing for the current year excluding the temporary effects of financial interventions , RM pension plan and transfers from the BoE APFF will be less than £116.5bn.

Another problem is that these figures change over time. I think we would need to agree that the first figures published by the OBR after the end of the financial year were determinative even if they are subsequently revised (this is probably in your favour).

Do we have an agreement. If we do what is the normal way of recording it on here?

taffys · October 2013

This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

Will ed be supporting tory attempts to trim green taxes in the face of suicidal lib dem opposition?

That'll be an interesting call for consumer champion ed. wonder which way he will jump.

Plato · October 2013

ToryBusiness @ToryBusiness
Real help for small businesses with the NI bill today. 450,000 employers will be taken out of paying NI contributions altogether #business

TGOHF · October 2013

taffys said:
This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

Will ed be supporting tory attempts to trim green taxes in the face of suicidal lib dem opposition?

That'll be an interesting call for consumer champion ed. wonder which way he will jump.

Green taxes - can argue until the cows come home who brought them in but only one chap can cut them before the GE.

Time to see how big GO's balls are.

DavidL · October 2013

tim said:

rcs1000 said:
Hello: I've made some changes to the site, and I'd like everyone to check whether they are now getting the latest story on the site.

Thanks
I've logged in on Chrome and am getting a different Dan Hodges story every day with the same conclusion.
How do I fix it?

Excellent.

Plato · October 2013

TGOHF said:

taffys said:
This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

Will ed be supporting tory attempts to trim green taxes in the face of suicidal lib dem opposition?

That'll be an interesting call for consumer champion ed. wonder which way he will jump.

Green taxes - can argue until the cows come home who brought them in but only one chap can cut them before the GE.

Time to see how big GO's balls are.

I quite agree - he'd please many Tory voters, and those who are irked but not Blue Team yet. I wrote to Mr Cameron before the last GE and expressed my WTF? view here and got a pat on the head and told about how AGW was terribly important... I hope its now finally sinking in.

JonnyJimmy · October 2013

Hodges count this thread - RW 2 (including this post) LW 8

CarlottaVance · October 2013

edmundintokyo said:

CarlottaVance said:
"Since Miliband’s speech, the wider UK electricity and gas sector has suffered a 5.4 per cent fall in stock prices, whereas the same sector in Europe (ex-UK) is up around five per cent, implying a 10.4 per cent swing. Looking just at Britain’s SSE and Centrica versus Germany’s RWE and E.On since the speech, the swing ranges from 14 per cent to 17 per cent in favour of the latter. SSE and Centrica have lost seven per cent and six per cent of their value respectively against the FTSE 100 – a combined £3bn hit to their market cap relative to the market. -

See more at: http://www.cityam.com/article/1381721764/miliband-s-policies-have-already-damaged-britain-s-economy#sthash.daiZSILR.Dy8KBUs1.dpuf
The actual policy is to ditch the Blair adminstration's competition regime and go back to something closer to the Major administration's one, which is supposed to make it easier for new entrants to compete with the big firms.

That's not whats hogged the headlines - but you are right, the number of utility suppliers more than halved under Labour from 14 to 6......

CarlottaVance · October 2013

Quite long, but entertaining Ferguson demolition of Krugman - whose MO seems vaguely familiar:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/niall-ferguson-paul-krugman-gets-it-wrong-again-and-again-and-again-why-does-anyone-still-listen-to-him/

MikeSmithson · October 2013

Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB
It's no change with Populus online
Lab 39=
CON 34=
LD 12 =
UKIP 8 =

CarlottaVance · October 2013

Bobajob said:
@Plato, Taffys

This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

Do you have a source for that (other than convicted perverter of the course of public justice, Chris Huhne)?

Bobajob · October 2013

Plato said:

TGOHF said:

taffys said:
This would all be great were it not for the fact that Ozzy is responsible for putting up green taxes.

Will ed be supporting tory attempts to trim green taxes in the face of suicidal lib dem opposition?

That'll be an interesting call for consumer champion ed. wonder which way he will jump.

Green taxes - can argue until the cows come home who brought them in but only one chap can cut them before the GE.

Time to see how big GO's balls are.
I quite agree - he'd please many Tory voters, and those who are irked but not Blue Team yet. I wrote to Mr Cameron before the last GE and expressed my WTF? view here and got a pat on the head and told about how AGW was terribly important... I hope its now finally sinking in.

I presume you are referring to the ice cap.

edmundintokyo · October 2013

CarlottaVance said:

edmundintokyo said:

CarlottaVance said:
"Since Miliband’s speech, the wider UK electricity and gas sector has suffered a 5.4 per cent fall in stock prices, whereas the same sector in Europe (ex-UK) is up around five per cent, implying a 10.4 per cent swing. Looking just at Britain’s SSE and Centrica versus Germany’s RWE and E.On since the speech, the swing ranges from 14 per cent to 17 per cent in favour of the latter. SSE and Centrica have lost seven per cent and six per cent of their value respectively against the FTSE 100 – a combined £3bn hit to their market cap relative to the market. -

See more at: http://www.cityam.com/article/1381721764/miliband-s-policies-have-already-damaged-britain-s-economy#sthash.daiZSILR.Dy8KBUs1.dpuf
The actual policy is to ditch the Blair adminstration's competition regime and go back to something closer to the Major administration's one, which is supposed to make it easier for new entrants to compete with the big firms.
That's not whats hogged the headlines - but you are right, the number of utility suppliers more than halved under Labour from 14 to 6......

Right, I'm assuming the markets are looking at the actual policy rather than the headlines, if that's even what's responsible for the recent price changes.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking at the 2010 CON voters whom Cameron has to win back

Comments