Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The economy might be recovering but new poll by Populus fin

2

Comments

  • On topic, these findings are significant, and though I would expect the good economic news to gradually feed through into the hearts, minds and wallets of the electorate, I remain sceptical that it will do so with sufficient vigour for the Conservatives to recover sufficiently to win the election. There seems to be great reluctance to give the Government credit, particularly from those who said all along that the Government would fail and who have learned nothing from their error. One of the many problems for the Tories is that it is very unlikely they will get the credit they deserve and they cannot insist they are given it.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,627
    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24915128

    Market forces at work!

    philiph said:

    MaxPB

    Can I ask you a question about the games industry, using Vanilla message system?

    Thanks Philip

    Sure.
    Thanks, I have
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,382
    @MaxPB

    Actually, I think the place where Europe is certifiably insane is in the arena of green levys and the like.

    The Eurozone economies - excepting Germany and a few others - had insanely regulated economies, which when combined with high levels of government spending and overly generous welfare states, resulted in very rigid labour markets at a time when world economic demand turned down. For those economies with private sector over-leverage (Spain and Ireland), or public sector (Greece and Spain), or a bit of both (Portugal), this was a kiss of death.

    The austerity push out of Berlin might have led to appallingly high unemployment rates in many countries, but without it, labour market reform was never going to happen. The alternative - devaluation and no reform - is just a slow path to economic suicide.

    Five years ago, Spain had much more tightly regulated labour than we do. Now it's the opposite. That puts them in a pretty good position to recover. (The same is true of Ireland).

    The great concerns for the Eurozone are not the people who took the German medicine (Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Estonia, Latvia), but those who did not (Italy and France)
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    This is an excellent graph, but at least its very clear what the tories need to do to win. If they CAN make more people feel better off, where does that leave labour?
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,265
    Afternoon all :)

    Very interesting poll from Populus and let's hope this becomes a regular feature unlike the pointless daily VI YOuGov numbers.

    I would class myself in the 27% who fully realise there is a recovery but do not consider it has reached them yet. There's plenty of statistical and indeed anecdotal evidence to show the economic picture has improved and is improving.

    Fpr a large number of people, however, I would argue that whatever small increments in wages they have seen have been more than offset by rises in costs. As a Londoner and a commuter, my big bugbear is or are fares. Next January, they will rise again far above inflation and indeed far above my wage rise so as a small but significant part of my expenses I notice that.

    There's also the nagging sense that the current monetary policy framework can't last forever and that potentially sharp rises in interest rates are on the horizon. The cynic might argue they are being deliberately pushed back until a May 2015 election but I'm sure that's not the case.
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,892
    Neil said:

    MaxPB said:

    but says that all other parties would be slaves to the same German policies so it elections there are now more like a plebiscite.

    Wilders brought down the last government over its austerity plans and the Socialists are obviously strongly against them too. In the last election the Dutch clearly chose centrist parties advocating austerity over the alternative of less centrist parties promising less austerity.
    I guess he is just more cynical than you Neil!
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Sick joke of the day .. Saudi Arabia,China and Russia all elected onto the Human Rights Council...talk about devaluing the currency..
  • John Rentoul tweets: Poll Finding of the Day: Clegg up one to neck-and-neck with EdM as "a natural leader". They are both on 4% YouGov.
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    @shipmate

    "See Mike is still the unofficial spin doctor for the reds. It's always worth linking the political news of the day and Mike's articles- it's a pretty common and obvious theme now!"

    If Mike is as you say now the unofficial spin doctor for the reds it rather makes his point. That Lib Dems like him however committed are leaving their party in droves in favour of Labour thus leaving the Tories with zero chance at the next election.

    Certainly how it's starting to look. I have to say that the new Tory Lib Dems have never looked less attractive to me and I'm a typical target voter.
  • SeanT said:

    Bobajob said:

    I'm of the view there will be no referendum, because the BOO nutters will soon get the creeping realisation they would lose it, thus giving them nothing to obsess and froth about for a generation. Therefore they will stop pushing for one.

    Did the "nutters" of the SNP stop pressing for a referendum because they were scared they'd lose it? No. Ditto the kippers and Booers, they are true believers, like the Nats - and they also think that they can win over an ambivalent public with the passion of their argument.

    Are they right? Europhiles like to loftily dismiss them, but if europhiles were really that convinced they'd win any EU vote, they would have called a vote in the past and sealed our fate: locking us into the EU (and the euro).

    Europhiles have never called that vote. Indeed they have strenuously avoided a vote, with increasingly absurd arguments, for decades.

    Why are they so keen not to give us a say? Because they are scared, deep down, that they could lose. There is no other explanation.
    "Because they are scared, deep down, that they could lose." -> well, it certainly explains why Yookay politicians have resisted the IndyRef for so long. But at the end of the day they could only resist the will of the people up to a certain point.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 55,112
    edited November 2013

    Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

  • I Live in the Netherlands. The big issue is HUGE levels of personal debt. The government used to give 100% tax deductibility for mortgage interest. So everyone got a 100% of value interest-only mortgage and basically watched the taxpayer pay for their house while waiting for its capital value to go up. Totally unsustainable. So the government killed the interest relief and property prices collapsed - leaving most with a big new interest payment to service and scary levels of negative equity. The Dutch housing market is badly knackered - sales and rentals. I live in a big house in central The Hague for only E2,000 a month - in London it would be 10 times as much. Housing policy lunacy has left large numbers very short of cash. So little gets spent. It won't get better until people can claw their way back above water on their houses.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,144
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 4m
    Former Cabinet Secretary says Blair's Cabinet kept out of loop on key Iraq papers, Civil Service World reports. http://polho.me/HY6D0s
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    Come back Hunchman all is forgiven. Thanks to Osborne's new Canadian genius every time unemployment looks like it's dropping the stock market takes a dive.

    Pure Genius!
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Patrick said:

    I Live in the Netherlands. The big issue is HUGE levels of personal debt. The government used to give 100% tax deductibility for mortgage interest. So everyone got a 100% of value interest-only mortgage and basically watched the taxpayer pay for their house while waiting for its capital value to go up. Totally unsustainable. So the government killed the interest relief and property prices collapsed - leaving most with a big new interest payment to service and scary levels of negative equity. The Dutch housing market is badly knackered - sales and rentals. I live in a big house in central The Hague for only E2,000 a month - in London it would be 10 times as much. Housing policy lunacy has left large numbers very short of cash. So little gets spent. It won't get better until people can claw their way back above water on their houses.

    Which is why a collapse in house prices would have been disastrous for the UK; would have been calamitous for the Tories, and why tim hates Osborne so much.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,892
    Roger said:

    Come back Hunchman all is forgiven. Thanks to Osborne's new Canadian genius every time unemployment looks like it's dropping the stock market takes a dive.

    Pure Genius!

    Same as in the US, or any other country with a huge monetary stimulus programme.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,114
    philiph said:


    To answer a different question with the aim of getting to the right answer, I think heaven and earth need to be moved to rebalance the economy. The rich, super rich, filthy rich and obscenely rich have created a class that is repugnant and unjustified. There is a massive need to stop the easy merry go round of corporate excess and rewarded failure.

    I would support a John Lewis regulation on limiting the maximum any one employee can earn to a multiplier of 'x'. Bonus payments too, they trader needs the cleaner and technician to work. There has been an unhealthy and accelerating trend from late 80s to 2008 of corporate greed, and I find it offensive as do millions of others.

    That's an interesting comment as I think I'm right in saying that philiph would put himself generally on the right of the spectrum. There is a substantial dislike across much of society of the extremes of wealth disparity that we are seeing developing, and it brings together very different sorts of people, just as the let-it-rip success-is-great school of thought has its fans on both left and right (philiph meet Dennis Skinner, but don't meet Tony Blair). It's not a solely British issue - the increased premium for people with special skills (or media attractiveness) is widening the gulf everywhere.

    Personally I think it worrying too, and only capable of being addressed by international action - tax havens are a small example of the issues that need to be tackled. I'm not especially optimistic that it will happen any time soon.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    rcs1000 said:

    @isam,

    Thought experiment: assume half the countries (chosen at random) in the world decided to allow free movement of labour and capital, and the other half decided to impose restrictions on where people were allowed to live, and who people were allowed to work for, and who people were allowed to buy good and services from.

    Which half of the world do you think would do better?

    I know which one I'd bet on. And I think you know where all the smart people would want to be. I think the most creative and productive people relish competition, don't you?

    I cant put it better than the great man himself at 2mins 38

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7eqTm2YZhY
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    @Tim

    "Buried Tory green speeches unearthed" by Benedict Brogan

    How we laughed! If Labour fancy a witty PPB look no further
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,144
    @tim Perhaps it is a cost cutting measure, let Cameron's opponents bear the cost of storage...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,826
    Governor of the Bank this morning:

    "Inflation is now as low as it has been since 2009. Jobs are being created at a rate of 60,000
    per month. The economy is growing at its fastest pace in 6 years."

    Just the facts sir, just the facts.

    Unless you work in an economic think tank somewhere very, very few of the population will have any feel for this nebulous beast called "the economy." They rely upon what they are told by the BBC and the media. What they are told from those stories inevitably focusses on disappointments like the job losses in ship building or familiar retailers going into administration.

    It takes time for the better news to filter through. A fall in unemployment in one month or quarter has little effect. Quarter after quarter after quarter will. The increase over the last quarter for employment was substantial. Employment is up well over 300K on a year ago, most of that recently. It will have an impact.

    When people consider their own affairs they will find in most cases that they are not that much affected. The wage increases have been modest to non existent but tax has fallen a bit for most and mortgages are well down on a few years ago. It's not great but it is not bad either and it is starting to feel a little more secure.

    Labour hopes that the tories will get little or no credit for this. They may be right. They certainly have not got much so far. But Labour don't have a story to sell. Their predictions of unemployment and disaster came to nought. Their promise to spend more government money is met with incredulity. Their opposition to benefit cuts is unpopular. They have had considerable success with the energy price freeze. It has given them a boost beyond question. Can they repeat that and keep repeating it as the good news in the real world gets better and better? I hope not.
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    Again, you profoundly misunderstand. The Union Flag would not be "the standard for rUK". It is Her Majesty's royal banner.

    One wonders why so many English people hate their own flag.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,144
    edited November 2013
    Balls sends a message over Bedroom Subsidy...

    http://order-order.com/2013/11/13/labour-mps-who-didnt-turn-up-for-yesterdays-vote-in-full/

    with about 45 other Labour MPs who didn't vote on The "Bedroom Tax".
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    edited November 2013
    @Mike

    "When are we going to get an inquiry into the Finchley selection in 1958 that led to Mrs Thatcher entering parliament?"

    No wonder so many good citizens went out in all weathers to try to put this injustice right by chanting Maggie! Maggie! Maggie! Out! Out! Out!
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,414
    Another reason people don't feel the benefit of the recovery is that although unemployment is falling underemployment (people in part time jobs who want full time work but can't find it) is at record levels and rising.

    http://ymlp.com/zEiqti
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    "A review by the European Commission is looking into whether Germany's international trade surplus is hampering Europe's economic recovery.

    Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said it wanted to see if Germany "could do more" to help rebalance the European economy.

    The Commission is also scrutinising 15 other European countries for not meeting EU economic targets.

    France, Italy and Hungary were also told to take "decisive policy action".

    An investigation led by the Commission will use new powers to look into the economic programmes of the 16 countries. It will run until May 2014.

    Analysts have accused Germany, which has the EU's biggest economy, of relying too much on exports and not doing enough to boost domestic demand.

    Mr Barroso said: "This is not about the EU running economies in place of national governments."!!!!!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24922975

    Surely the rest of the EZ & EU need to learn from Germany - this shows that Brussels is afraid of Germany dictating economic policy with this unnecessary review that should be ignored by Frau Merkel.

    Of course by May 2014, everything may have changed and the report will be only fit for WPB. Europe burns whilst Brussels fiddles.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    tim said:

    Anyone tempted into thinking Powell was a great man due to their slavering worship of his racial views should read this for another aspect of his personality, equally unpleasant

    http://blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/01/14/the-thalidomide-scandal-and-the-forgotten-role-of-enoch-powell/

    Reminds me of being at Brighton University when the students were handed Powell's speech, a highlighter and told to find racism, then given a "balanced critique" written by Paul Foot.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    jusr skimming through this thread leaves me to believe that Tim must run his private knocking shop - must be the reason why he doesn't get out much and see the real world and real people.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,627

    philiph said:



    That's an interesting comment as I think I'm right in saying that philiph would put himself generally on the right of the spectrum. There is a substantial dislike across much of society of the extremes of wealth disparity that we are seeing developing, and it brings together very different sorts of people, just as the let-it-rip success-is-great school of thought has its fans on both left and right (philiph meet Dennis Skinner, but don't meet Tony Blair). It's not a solely British issue - the increased premium for people with special skills (or media attractiveness) is widening the gulf everywhere.

    Personally I think it worrying too, and only capable of being addressed by international action - tax havens are a small example of the issues that need to be tackled. I'm not especially optimistic that it will happen any time soon.
    I am put on the right by people who (in my opinion) fail to recognise the inherent incontinence of the policies they espouse.

    I tend to think that the right offers a better way to manage the economy, and if the economy is well managed there will potentially be goodies for all. I don't think that occupying a right sided view on economic matters means that I am only interested in the rich. I happen to think that those who are earning in the bottom 30% would be better off in an economy well run by the principles of the right. My right sided view also does not prevent me from believing the unemployed, unemployable and disabled deserve to be treated well. I just don't think showering cash in a demented way in the general direction of the needy is the best way. I have no compunction in thinking that the needy require respect, giving benefits willy nilly isn't good for self esteem, there are better ways to use inputs for better outcomes.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Roger said:

    Thanks to Osborne's new Canadian genius

    Turns out he is Irish. We await tim's verdict on whether he has ancestral links to Ballintaylor or Ballylemon.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,397
    philiph said:

    philiph said:



    That's an interesting comment as I think I'm right in saying that philiph would put himself generally on the right of the spectrum. There is a substantial dislike across much of society of the extremes of wealth disparity that we are seeing developing, and it brings together very different sorts of people, just as the let-it-rip success-is-great school of thought has its fans on both left and right (philiph meet Dennis Skinner, but don't meet Tony Blair). It's not a solely British issue - the increased premium for people with special skills (or media attractiveness) is widening the gulf everywhere.

    Personally I think it worrying too, and only capable of being addressed by international action - tax havens are a small example of the issues that need to be tackled. I'm not especially optimistic that it will happen any time soon.


    I tend to think that the right offers a better way to manage the economy, and if the economy is well managed there will potentially be goodies for all. I don't think that occupying a right sided view on economic matters means that I am only interested in the rich. I happen to think that those who are earning in the bottom 30% would be better off in an economy well run by the principles of the right. My right sided view also does not prevent me from believing the unemployed, unemployable and disabled deserve to be treated well. I just don't think showering cash in a demented way in the general direction of the needy is the best way. I have no compunction in thinking that the needy require respect, giving benefits willy nilly isn't good for self esteem, there are better ways to use inputs for better outcomes.

    Indeed, shorter version is that every Labour government ends with higher unemployment than it started with.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    The BBC are plugging this story in their "latest" section at the top (and have been for a while).

    Story NOT in top 10 reads.

    In the real world, no one cares.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,591
    OT. Anyone know if the average contributor to Guido is yet at secondary school? Following Dr Spyn's link I noticed the first message was from a poster who calls him/herself

    'Dave Likes a Big One Up the Arse'.......

    Could Martin Day have made a comeback?
  • #bedroomtax makes uncomfortable reading for Labour on twitter - multiple tweets about 'why didn't Labour MP X' vote...and the SNP have not been slow - pointing out that all 6 voted, but 10 Scottish Labour MPs didn't vote.....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,235
    Next said:

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    The BBC are plugging this story in their "latest" section at the top (and have been for a while).

    Story NOT in top 10 reads.

    In the real world, no one cares.
    Indeed - noone gives two shits about this, or Falkirk for that matter.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,788
    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    A quick question: are Ed Miliband's speeches from when he was energy secretary on the Labour website?

    But yes, it looks bad.

    However I disagree about the journalist - the tone of the article was terrible. Let the facts speak for themselves.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,414
    Next said:

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    The BBC are plugging this story in their "latest" section at the top (and have been for a while).

    Story NOT in top 10 reads.

    In the real world, no one cares.
    No, I agree this will not move the polls. But it's such a dumb thing to do it is bound to give ammunition to the other parties. Cue lots of embarrassing quotes from deleted speeches, which otherwise would have been ignored.


  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Pulpstar said:

    Next said:

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    The BBC are plugging this story in their "latest" section at the top (and have been for a while).

    Story NOT in top 10 reads.

    In the real world, no one cares.
    Indeed - noone gives two shits about this, or Falkirk for that matter.
    I beg to differ - one story will not keep the leader from doing media.

    One leader hasn't done an interview or taken a question since the "how scared are you of Len on a scale of 1-10" incident.

    And won't be doing Newsnight etc n anytime soon either.



  • Even the BBC are mentioning Falkirk in the context of Labour funding...:

    Unite still Labour's largest backer despite Falkirk row
    The Unite union remains Labour's largest financial backer, new figures show, despite the fall-out from the Falkirk candidate selection row.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24929107
  • Roger said:

    OT. Anyone know if the average contributor to Guido is yet at secondary school?

    I have absolutely no idea or interest as to the demography of Guido’s site. – And would humbly advise you avoid reading the comments at all cost–Oh, that way madness lies.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
  • Roger said:

    OT. Anyone know if the average contributor to Guido is yet at secondary school?

    And would humbly advise you avoid reading the comments at all cost–Oh, that way madness lies.
    Its a bit like 'Tourette's-anonymous!'

  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    Aha! Now I understand why you are getting yourself in such a mess: you don't have the faintest clue about heraldry or flags. You are confusing the Queen's standard (as used in England & Wales) with her Union banner.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    you don't have the faintest clue about heraldry

    A sorry state of affairs, Stuart.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    UKIP Plymstock poppy wreath logo sparks political row

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-24911880

  • Londoners vote for their favourite Tube line:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/13/northern-line/

    Jubilee top, Northern bottom.....
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    You are confusing the Queen's standard (as used in England & Wales) with her Union banner.
    And why do you care what flag rUK uses?

  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548

    Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    Would the Queen have a say in the flag that an independent Scotland uses?
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Interesting stuff around today.

    On YouGov, well, it takes a while for such a massive story as FalkirkGateAgeddon to feed through to shellshocked voters, eh? Chuckle. I see Guido and his disciples are still gamely plugging away though, bless 'em.

    On banning polls, an excellent idea for the good of democracy (if not punters) in my book. Easily enforcable too, if not by law then the MRS Code of Conduct or similar, which no respected polling company would breach.

    On voters not feeling any recovery, no surprise at all, part of the reason Labour's Cost of Living thing is running so well. Despite Cameron and Osborne's Tractor Stats, voters don't feel better off because, erm, they're not.

    On the Tories airbrushing history. Hilarious. You couldn't make this sh!t up. Who is running that shambles of a Party, Sideshow Bob?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
    Tax cuts pay for themselves and more as we've seen already this year.

  • NextNext Posts: 826
    edited November 2013
    @R0berts.

    Talking of airbrushing history, how many Blairites are there left in Labour's shadow cabinet?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited November 2013
    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
    Tax cuts pay for themselves and more as we've seen already this year.

    What's stopping Osborne then?

    Besides reality.
  • Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    You are confusing the Queen's standard (as used in England & Wales) with her Union banner.
    And why do you care what flag rUK uses?

    Who said I did?
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    You are confusing the Queen's standard (as used in England & Wales) with her Union banner.
    And why do you care what flag rUK uses?

    Who said I did?
    In any case, as the Union of the Crowns will continue so will the Union flag....

  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,897

    Londoners vote for their favourite Tube line:

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/13/northern-line/

    Jubilee top, Northern bottom.....

    Pleasing to see the District in second place. It's great, so long as you're not in too much of a hurry!
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited November 2013
    SeanT said:



    Er, that's why I said these bribes would be "economically unjustified".

    My point wasnt about whether bribes would be justified.

    But that the ground Osborne has laid for his electoral strategy (ie saying he's going for a budget surplus and challenging Labour to match that aim) isnt compatible with your suggested approach.

    In the end he may panic and go for huge unfunded tax cuts but that would be a clear u-turn from the path he has clearly set out.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited November 2013
    Carlotta, control yourself, you must understand that the non-story in Falkirk is totally unimportant, just like Watergate
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Carlotta, control yourself, you must understand that the non-story in Falkirk is totally unimportant, just like Watergate

    We wont rest until Ed is impeached.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
    Er, that's why I said these bribes would be "economically unjustified".


    Any bribe would be justified if it kept Labour out for another 5 years.

    Otherwise the milky bars are on Ed all the way down into the gutter just like 2008/1978.




  • Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
    So, in Seniorista Land the Scottish Lib Dems on 2% is a flawed poll, whereas the Scottish Lib Dems on 15% is a sound poll.

    Meanwhile, back in the land of the sane, we remember that the Scottish Lib Dems got 19% last time.
  • Pulpstar said:

    If Scotland goes independent - will the blue have to be got rid of on the union flag ?

    No Union, no Union Flag.
    You don't get a vote. We'll use what we darn well please.

    Well, you don't get a vote either. The Union Flag is a royal banner. The only person who gets a "vote" on its design is HRH Queen Elizabeth I & II.
    And no doubt she will act on the advice of her Prime Minister in Downing Street......

    You misunderstand Her Majesty's constitutional status. She does not have one prime minister. She has several.
    Yes, but for the standard for rUK she will ask the advice of the Prime Minister for rUK....no one else.....Or is Eck going to go around the world to the dozen or so countries that have the Union flag as part of their own and demand that they remove the blue bit?

    It is Her Majesty's royal banner.
    I think you mean this:

    http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/Symbols/RoyalStandard.aspx

    Anyway, why are you worried what flag rUK uses? Scotland can use wee Eck's drawers for all I care!
    You are confusing the Queen's standard (as used in England & Wales) with her Union banner.
    And why do you care what flag rUK uses?

    Who said I did?
    In any case, as the Union of the Crowns will continue so will the Union flag....

    Again, youy display your complete misunderstanding of what the Union Flag is. It is the banner of a monarch, not of a state. The "Union of the Crowns" (a misnomer by the way) was a personal union, not a political one.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
    So, in Seniorista Land the Scottish Lib Dems on 2% is a flawed poll, whereas the Scottish Lib Dems on 15% is a sound poll.

    Meanwhile, back in the land of the sane, we remember that the Scottish Lib Dems got 19% last time.
    After 5 or more years of posting them wirhout learning a thing , you still don't get it . All sub samples are a flawed waste of space , none of them are sound .
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:



    Er, that's why I said these bribes would be "economically unjustified".

    My point wasnt about whether bribes would be justified.

    But that the ground Osborne has laid for his electoral strategy (ie saying he's going for a budget surplus and challenging Labour to match that aim) isnt compatible with your suggested approach.

    In the end he may panic and go for huge unfunded tax cuts but that would be a clear u-turn from the path he has clearly set out.
    He will lie. It's what they do.
    But first he would have to rip up his entire election strategy.
  • Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
    So, in Seniorista Land the Scottish Lib Dems on 2% is a flawed poll, whereas the Scottish Lib Dems on 15% is a sound poll.

    Meanwhile, back in the land of the sane, we remember that the Scottish Lib Dems got 19% last time.
    After 5 or more years of posting them wirhout learning a thing , you still don't get it . All sub samples are a flawed waste of space , none of them are sound .
    Au contraire. If that were true then we would frequently see strange Scottish sub-samples like:

    Con 38%
    Jacobite 30%
    SSP 12%
    SNP 12%
    Lab 3%
    LD 2%

    The fact that we never do get bizarre results like that. Well, apart from the bit about the LDs being on 2%. :)

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 55,112
    edited November 2013

    Again, youy display your complete misunderstanding of what the Union Flag is. It is the banner of a monarch, not of a state. The "Union of the Crowns" (a misnomer by the way) was a personal union, not a political one.

    To quote the SNP:

    The national flag of Scotland would be the Saltire (the St Andrew's Cross), says the SNP.

    "The flag of the rest of the UK will be a matter for the rest of the UK," a spokesman said.

    On BBC's Question Time programme earlier this month, the SNP's Alex Neil said the Queen was monarch in 16 countries and she would remain head of state in Scotland. Therefore he said, the union of the Crowns would remain and, thus, the Union Flag.

    He said: "The union of the crowns was in 1603, 104 years before the union of the parliaments. What independence is about is the dissolution of the parliaments not the dissolution of the union of the crowns.
  • Neil said:


    In the end he may panic and go for huge unfunded tax cuts but that would be a clear u-turn from the path he has clearly set out.

    Osborne has been cutting tax rates for some time and it is generating higher tax takes.

    If he cuts income tax on the basic rate in 2014 he'll get it all back in VAT, booze and fags duty etc etc.

    The path is clear - lower tax rates, bigger tax takes.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    SeanT said:

    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
    Er, that's why I said these bribes would be "economically unjustified".


    Any bribe would be justified if it kept Labour out for another 5 years.

    Otherwise the milky bars are on Ed all the way down into the gutter just like 2008/1978.




    Agreed. Indeed I am thinking of doing a blog on this. The last Labour government left us with the biggest recession in history, a vastly inflated debt, the worst ever collapse in industrial production, the slowest decade of growth since the war, and the worst deficit in the OECD.

    That Labour government also cost us 16% of expected economic growth - i.e. our economy would be 16% bigger if Brown's bust had never happened. To put that in figures, 16% of UK GDP is approximately £300 BILLION.

    Therefore we can say a Labour government costs three hundred billion to the country. So any sum beneath that figure can be given away to the people, and justified as the price that must be paid to keep Labour out of office.

    e.g. they could offer to give everyone in the country - every man, woman and child - £1000 each, to spend on whatever they like. That would cost £64 billion - five times cheaper than the cost, to all of us, of a new Labour government.

    In that context, it is a bargain.
    It's £300 billion A YEAR. Never knowingly understated ;-)
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699

    Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
    So, in Seniorista Land the Scottish Lib Dems on 2% is a flawed poll, whereas the Scottish Lib Dems on 15% is a sound poll.

    Meanwhile, back in the land of the sane, we remember that the Scottish Lib Dems got 19% last time.
    After 5 or more years of posting them wirhout learning a thing , you still don't get it . All sub samples are a flawed waste of space , none of them are sound .
    Au contraire. If that were true then we would frequently see strange Scottish sub-samples like:

    Con 38%
    Jacobite 30%
    SSP 12%
    SNP 12%
    Lab 3%
    LD 2%

    The fact that we never do get bizarre results like that. Well, apart from the bit about the LDs being on 2%. :)

    But we do , we have had at least one Scottish sub sample this year with the Conservatives over 30% and more than one with SNP 15% or lower . I know Maths is one of your many weak subjects but the sample sizes in these sub samples are too small and they are not individually weighted therefore their results are statistically too inaccurate to draw anything meaningful from them .
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    tim said:

    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:


    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.

    Where does the money come from? As recently as conference season he was setting out his aim to achieve a budget surplus, that just doesnt leave space for bribes worthy of the name.
    Er, that's why I said these bribes would be "economically unjustified".


    Any bribe would be justified if it kept Labour out for another 5 years.

    Otherwise the milky bars are on Ed all the way down into the gutter just like 2008/1978.




    Remember what happens when Osborne gives tax cuts or spends money though.
    The tax take goes up...

  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    A quick question: are Ed Miliband's speeches from when he was energy secretary on the Labour website?

    But yes, it looks bad.

    However I disagree about the journalist - the tone of the article was terrible. Let the facts speak for themselves.
    It's the uncovering of the story that's the scoop - I'm sure Computer Weekly don't have a vast subbing budget.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    It's in the interest of both Coalition parties for voters to *feel* they are part of the recovery.

    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.


    How much confidence do you have in Osborne getting it right this time, maybe he'll try to top the Omnishambles by introducing a tax cut for Baronets paid for by a levy on gravy.
    I think they might end up cutting income tax or employees' NI. I actually agree with Sean on this - it's the only thing that might work.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    If he cuts income tax on the basic rate in 2014 he'll get it all back in VAT, booze and fags duty etc etc..

    Sheesh, what a moron he was for not doing that this year as well as in 2014 and 2015.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:


    The election strategy was "beat Labour". That will continue.

    I expect Osborne will frame his giveaways with some "the fantastic economic upturn allows us to be more generous than expected" bullshit, along with blatantly copying Ed's energy gimmick.

    If that was his strategy all along then why did he go down the cul de sac of aiming for a budget surplus in his conference speech?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,788
    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    A quick question: are Ed Miliband's speeches from when he was energy secretary on the Labour website?

    But yes, it looks bad.

    However I disagree about the journalist - the tone of the article was terrible. Let the facts speak for themselves.
    It's the uncovering of the story that's the scoop - I'm sure Computer Weekly don't have a vast subbing budget.
    What story? That the Tories have chosen to remove some data off their website?

    Data that Labour doesn't appear to have on-line, (*) and that they're complaining the Tories have removed?

    As I've said before, it looks bad. Not terrible, just bad. But if Labour does not have the equivalent data on-line, then it's rather hypocritical of them to berate the Conservatives of removing the equivalents.

    As stories go, it's weaker then an MP swearing at a policeman.

    (*) They may have it on-line, but just hidden in a basement behind a sign saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.
  • currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    Going back to the spare room subsidy, does any one who argues against this policy still think that there is not enough social housing for those people in under crowded accommodation to trade down to.

    http://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2013/11/from-harryph-labour-ignore-the-plight-of-the-overcrowded.html

    I do wonder how labour can get away with their lies on this.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    A giveaway budget would be financially imprudent, but with an election year is bound to be on the cards.

    A phased removal of National Insurance until it disappears completely would have several advantages. It would benefit the low paid, as the NI threshold is quite low, it would benefit the workers as it is not paid by pensioners or those with investment income, and it would put pounds in peoples pockets. It would be the simplist way to integrate NI and income tax by abolition of one of them. It would set up a difficulty for Balls in that he would either have to match it, or rescind it, of put up taxes elsewhere.

    I can see it happening.
    Bobajob said:

    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    It's in the interest of both Coalition parties for voters to *feel* they are part of the recovery.

    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.


    How much confidence do you have in Osborne getting it right this time, maybe he'll try to top the Omnishambles by introducing a tax cut for Baronets paid for by a levy on gravy.
    I think they might end up cutting income tax or employees' NI. I actually agree with Sean on this - it's the only thing that might work.
  • Neil said:


    Sheesh, what a moron he was for not doing that this year as well as in 2014 and 2015.

    Oh dear - he's been doing it since 2010.

    The basic rate tax allowance in April 2014 will be £2630 higher than it would otherwise have been had it stayed linked to inflation.

    That's £526 a year extra in people's pockets.

    Having met their tax allowance pledge a year early the government will be free to work out how it wants to play from there.



  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 55,112
    edited November 2013

    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    This internet blunder is fuckwittery of the highest order which now turns every dusty old speech into a story. Great scoop by Computer Weekly - hope the humble trade journalist who got it is enjoying his place in the sun.

    A quick question: are Ed Miliband's speeches from when he was energy secretary on the Labour website?

    But yes, it looks bad.

    However I disagree about the journalist - the tone of the article was terrible. Let the facts speak for themselves.
    It's the uncovering of the story that's the scoop - I'm sure Computer Weekly don't have a vast subbing budget.
    What story? That the Tories have chosen to remove some data off their website?

    Data that Labour doesn't appear to have on-line, (*) and that they're complaining the Tories have removed?

    As I've said before, it looks bad. Not terrible, just bad. But if Labour does not have the equivalent data on-line, then it's rather hypocritical of them to berate the Conservatives of removing the equivalents.

    As stories go, it's weaker then an MP swearing at a policeman.

    (*) They may have it on-line, but just hidden in a basement behind a sign saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.
    The oldest document on the Labour Website is Ed's first conference speech:

    http://www.labour.org.uk/ed-miliband---a-new-generation

    28 September 2010.

    EDIT - but there are older speeches buried on it:

    http://www2.labour.org.uk/ed-milibands-speech-conference,2009-09-28
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,997
    tim said:

    I've realised there is one good thing about David Cameron becoming Prime Minister.
    When a child dies tragically, or is a victim of an horrendous crime there's no leader of the opposition trying to use it for their own benefit because they've been told it helps them to "connect" while repeating a "Broken Britain" mantra

    You mean no Leader of the Opposition, like one Tony Blair, who capitalized on the murder of James Bulger in 1993 by piously talking of a "moral vacuum".

    Isn't Blair your super-hero? Your sanctimony is revolting.
  • Here is "The Gold Standard" sub-sample for Scottish Westminster VI. Usual caveats apply. (+/- change from UK GE 2010)

    SNP 48% (+28)
    Lab 32% (-10)
    Con 14% (-3)
    UKIP 3% (+2)
    Grn 2% (+1)
    LD 2% (-17)

    ... and the English sub-sample:

    Lab 41%
    Con 31%
    UKIP 12%
    LD 12%
    Grn 3%

    http://www.icmresearch.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/11/2013_guardian_nov_poll.pdf

    Mark Senior is away to fetch his comfort blanket.

    and where was your post of the Yougov Scottish subsample on that day . I expect that Lib Dems at 15% had you reaching for the bottles of whisky and prozac .
    So, in Seniorista Land the Scottish Lib Dems on 2% is a flawed poll, whereas the Scottish Lib Dems on 15% is a sound poll.

    Meanwhile, back in the land of the sane, we remember that the Scottish Lib Dems got 19% last time.
    After 5 or more years of posting them wirhout learning a thing , you still don't get it . All sub samples are a flawed waste of space , none of them are sound .
    Au contraire. If that were true then we would frequently see strange Scottish sub-samples like:

    Con 38%
    Jacobite 30%
    SSP 12%
    SNP 12%
    Lab 3%
    LD 2%

    The fact that we never do get bizarre results like that. Well, apart from the bit about the LDs being on 2%. :)

    But we do , we have had at least one Scottish sub sample this year with the Conservatives over 30% and more than one with SNP 15% or lower . I know Maths is one of your many weak subjects but the sample sizes in these sub samples are too small and they are not individually weighted therefore their results are statistically too inaccurate to draw anything meaningful from them .
    Mark, we all know that if the SNP were on 2% you'd be screeching it from the rooftops. Whereas I am displaying remarkable self-restraint. Your principal problem is that you are a hypocrite of gigantic proportions.
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Bobajob said:

    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    It's in the interest of both Coalition parties for voters to *feel* they are part of the recovery.

    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.


    How much confidence do you have in Osborne getting it right this time, maybe he'll try to top the Omnishambles by introducing a tax cut for Baronets paid for by a levy on gravy.
    I think they might end up cutting income tax or employees' NI. I actually agree with Sean on this - it's the only thing that might work.

    There a couple of further problems with that, aside from the massive credibility problems that Neil and Tim have pointed out.

    Firstly, people don't tend to thank Governments for small tax cuts (though rage against rises) so it probably wouldn't work.

    Second, Labour have already said they'll stick to the current deficit reduction timetable. Big unfunded giveaways from Cameron and Osborne might even allow Labour to undercut them on the deficit. Tory strategy genuises wouldn't gift Labour a position where they can spend less than the profligate Tories, on top of all the other selling points - would they?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    A phased removal of National Insurance until it disappears completely would have several advantages.

    The coalition plans to increase NI by many billions of pounds.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    R0berts said:

    Bobajob said:

    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    It's in the interest of both Coalition parties for voters to *feel* they are part of the recovery.

    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.


    How much confidence do you have in Osborne getting it right this time, maybe he'll try to top the Omnishambles by introducing a tax cut for Baronets paid for by a levy on gravy.
    I think they might end up cutting income tax or employees' NI. I actually agree with Sean on this - it's the only thing that might work.

    There a couple of further problems with that, aside from the massive credibility problems that Neil and Tim have pointed out.

    Firstly, people don't tend to thank Governments for small tax cuts (though rage against rises) so it probably wouldn't work.

    Second, Labour have already said they'll stick to the current deficit reduction timetable. Big unfunded giveaways from Cameron and Osborne might even allow Labour to undercut them on the deficit. Tory strategy genuises wouldn't gift Labour a position where they can spend less than the profligate Tories, on top of all the other selling points - would they?
    Well that's the risk isn't it? Personally I hope they go for it, for the sheer fun of the politics.

  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Bobajob said:

    R0berts said:

    Bobajob said:

    tim said:

    SeanT said:

    It's in the interest of both Coalition parties for voters to *feel* they are part of the recovery.

    I expect Osborne to start giving away subsidies, price freezes and tax cuts quite soon, and to keep doing it until 2015. It will be a series of naked bribes, and economically unjustified, but he will do it anyway; otherwise the GE is lost.


    How much confidence do you have in Osborne getting it right this time, maybe he'll try to top the Omnishambles by introducing a tax cut for Baronets paid for by a levy on gravy.
    I think they might end up cutting income tax or employees' NI. I actually agree with Sean on this - it's the only thing that might work.

    There a couple of further problems with that, aside from the massive credibility problems that Neil and Tim have pointed out.

    Firstly, people don't tend to thank Governments for small tax cuts (though rage against rises) so it probably wouldn't work.

    Second, Labour have already said they'll stick to the current deficit reduction timetable. Big unfunded giveaways from Cameron and Osborne might even allow Labour to undercut them on the deficit. Tory strategy genuises wouldn't gift Labour a position where they can spend less than the profligate Tories, on top of all the other selling points - would they?
    Well that's the risk isn't it? Personally I hope they go for it, for the sheer fun of the politics.

    Heh it would be fun. It has the potential to backfire even more spectacularly than the Omnishambles or the 2p basic rate reduction budget from Labour. And, knowing the hapless, hopeless Cameron and Osborne Tories, it probably will.

  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 3,997
    edited November 2013
    @tim - When was Blair's apology? Couple of years back? In what context? You've been here for 8 years - with probably around 40,000 'posts' (sic) - and have never once condemned him for those remarks, have you?

    You don't fool anyone.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    I'm surprised that there is so much chatter about subsamples for, hum, a nation that starts just north of Carlisle.

    There was a time on PB when the mere mention of these, erm, Tartan datasets was a one-way ticket to exile for months on end.

    Stuart Dickson should know.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @Josias – it will have no effect on VI. As a story, I'd rate it as around the Falkirk level – good fun for political anoraks, for members of the public, irrelevant.

    But still very, very funny.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    tim said:

    Return of Gaffe-a-minute Grayling


    @georgeeaton: Tories digging a deeper hole. Grayling: "a limit to how much you can put and keep on your website year after year". (Via @VMcAVSKY)

    LOL
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,788
    tim said:

    Return of Gaffe-a-minute Grayling


    @georgeeaton: Tories digging a deeper hole. Grayling: "a limit to how much you can put and keep on your website year after year". (Via @VMcAVSKY)

    He's right, actually. Data needs maintenance. Storage is dirt-cheap nowadays, but whenever you alter the website, you may need to update all the pages. The more pages, the more work. Most companies trim their websites every so often.

    Labour's pages I linked to earlier, and the one Carlotta linked to below, shows the problem well.

    That's why templates are so useful. Until some director's nephew decides on a new template that he's seen at university that is really cool. (*) ;-)

    http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19980905

    (*) Not that any company I've worked for has been struck with the curse of nephew-art. Oh no.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,788
    Bobajob said:

    @Josias – it will have no effect on VI. As a story, I'd rate it as around the Falkirk level – good fun for political anoraks, for members of the public, irrelevant.

    But still very, very funny.

    I'm afraid you're deluding yourself. Even as it stands, it's a couple of orders of magnitude below Falkirk. After all, a minister's not resigned over it, and the police have not been called in. There's not been an internal inquiry to produce a dodgy dossier, that they refuse to publicly release.

    The two are incomparable. I know you want Falkirk to go away. I understand why. But personally I prefer people not to be signed up to a political party without their knowledge, or have a massive company put at risk due to a union's misbehaviour.

    However you are right. This will not affect VI.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,788
    tim said:

    @Josias

    You and Carlotta don't get any politics story right ever though, this is just a brilliant gift.

    I got Plebgate 100% right. You're still getting it wrong.

    And at least I'm not so utterly shallow as to proclaim, several times, that someone crying at a funeral would set the media narrative.

    As I said earlier today, forget your hatred and just go out for a walk.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Bobajob said:

    @Josias – it will have no effect on VI. As a story, I'd rate it as around the Falkirk level – good fun for political anoraks, for members of the public, irrelevant.

    But still very, very funny.

    I'm afraid you're deluding yourself. Even as it stands, it's a couple of orders of magnitude below Falkirk. After all, a minister's not resigned over it, and the police have not been called in. There's not been an internal inquiry to produce a dodgy dossier, that they refuse to publicly release.

    The two are incomparable. I know you want Falkirk to go away. I understand why. But personally I prefer people not to be signed up to a political party without their knowledge, or have a massive company put at risk due to a union's misbehaviour.

    However you are right. This will not affect VI.
    I am simultaneously deluding myself and right. I'm quite proud of that paradox, even though it shall surely mean both you and I will enter some sort of feedback loop and disappear in a puff of logic.

This discussion has been closed.