Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Miliband is still odds-on to become next PM

SystemSystem Posts: 12,685
edited November 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Miliband is still odds-on to become next PM

The only certainty is that the date in the fixed term parliament act for the next general election is May 7th 2015. It’s possible that the coalition could collapse before then creating the conditions for an earlier general election.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    UKIP first
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,895
    Unsurprising, but still some way off.

    In Scottish but not independence-related news, I rather like these equines: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-25108514
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,392
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Unsurprising, but still some way off.

    In Scottish but not independence-related news, I rather like these equines: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-25108514

    They had the scale models of them (still pretty large) in Dundee a few weeks ago. They looked superb, particularly in that window of 45 seconds when the sun was shining on them.

  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Of course, Ed could be next PM without becoming next PM after the next election...
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1
  • SchardsSchards Posts: 210
    No interest in tying up money for 5 years plus tbh
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,392
    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    I wonder whether it will be quite so easy next time......

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Political scandals on opposite sides of the Atlantic:

    Pretty much RT @allyfogg Politics, either side of the Atlantic pic.twitter.com/62r9IUtPXp
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T:

    "Anxiang Du guilty of murder of Northampton family of four":

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25123910
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.
    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Of the Prime Ministers since World War Two, Attlee, Home, Wilson (1), Heath, Callaghan, Major and Brown were replaced by the Leader of the Opposition at an election. Churchill, Eden, Macmillan, Wilson (2), Thatcher and Blair were replaced by internal rivals. On this basis, that makes it a priori about 5/6 that Ed Miliband will replace David Cameron (though Major was replaced by the third Leader of the Opposition that he faced, so those odds should be rated down more, maybe to 10/11).

    Given current polling, 8/11 looks almost exactly right to me.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Would you really want the Civil Service and Qangos to be running the country in the interim?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,436
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Yes, Italy's greatest economic successes happened during the 1970s and 1980s when it was - essentially - governmentless. I'm generally of the view that we need less government, not more.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,392
    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Presumably Germany has had a government though in that Angela Merkel has simply carried on. It is more difficult when the incumbent has clearly lost as with Brown in 2010 because it is then a lot less clear who should be the caretaker and what they should do. I recall Alastair Darling having allegedly overstepped the mark in respect of some EU crisis agreement.

    Belgium managed to have no government for more than 2 years. How that works I really don't know but presumably you do not get deluged in pointless and badly thought out legislation!
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,192
    rcs1000 said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Yes, Italy's greatest economic successes happened during the 1970s and 1980s when it was - essentially - governmentless. I'm generally of the view that we need less government, not more.
    Well, that's a case for having less Italian government...

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,436
    DavidL said:

    but presumably you do not get deluged in pointless and badly thought out legislation!

    exactly! masterful inaction.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,436
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Well, that's a case for having less Italian government...

    That reminds me of the wonderful conversation between a Milanese voter and Mrs Thatcher during the 1990 European election campaign

    Mrs Thatcher: But surely you don't want to be run by Brussels?
    Voter (shrugging): It has to be better than being run by Rome
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Cathy Newman blights the prospects of another Cameron replacement....

    http://blogs.channel4.com/cathy-newman-blog/destined-top-thatcherite-muslim-working-class-roots/106
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 40,054
    DavidL said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Presumably Germany has had a government though in that Angela Merkel has simply carried on. It is more difficult when the incumbent has clearly lost as with Brown in 2010 because it is then a lot less clear who should be the caretaker and what they should do. I recall Alastair Darling having allegedly overstepped the mark in respect of some EU crisis agreement.

    Belgium managed to have no government for more than 2 years. How that works I really don't know but presumably you do not get deluged in pointless and badly thought out legislation!

    A lot of government work in Germany and Belgium is done at the state level, isn't it? In Belgium Flanders and Wallonia are basically national governments except for defence and foreign affairs, I think.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,192
    rcs1000 said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Well, that's a case for having less Italian government...

    That reminds me of the wonderful conversation between a Milanese voter and Mrs Thatcher during the 1990 European election campaign

    Mrs Thatcher: But surely you don't want to be run by Brussels?
    Voter (shrugging): It has to be better than being run by Rome
    Yep, people who really hate Brussels tend not to comprehend mild indifference in others (and I accept the same can apply to Westminster haters).
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,192
    Guido gets on the Cowardy Custard Cam bandwagon. I presume its more from anticipation of seeing two of his bêtes noire tearing chunks out of each other rather than a deep desire to hear the 'ishoos' debated.

    'Cowardly Cameron Can Get Tae…
    Cam Cannot Continue to Dodge Caledonian Confrontation '

    http://tinyurl.com/qccmnlx
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Surely if Cam is going to do a tv debate it should be with the most important SNP'er in the United Kingdom - who is the leader of the party in Westminster ?

  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,857
    Very Kevin Pullein Mike!! Put up a tissue , discuss it and then say NO BET!!
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Hills cut their Yes price from 5/1 to 9/2. Bet365 lengthen their No price to 1/7.

    A lot of people were expecting post-White Paper polls, so we will probably see a fair amount of movement this week.

    Only GBP 50,530 matched at Betfair thus far, but that figure has been rising fast during the last couple of weeks.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Blue_rog said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Would you really want the Civil Service and Qangos to be running the country in the interim?
    ? They're running it now.

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    state_go_away said:

    Very Kevin Pullein Mike!! Put up a tissue , discuss it and then say NO BET!!

    The biggest advantage punters have over bookies is the option not to play. KP does take it to extremes sometimes, though I've recently heard he's looking for a serious mountain-climbing holiday.

    Recommendation: Tibet
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,338
    edited November 2013
    The Italian Senate has voted to expel ex-Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi from parliament with immediate effect over his conviction for tax fraud.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25128115
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,895
    I find criticism of Cameron in regard to the Scottish debate gimmick by Salmond to be baffling and ridiculous.

    It's a vote by Scots to determine the future of Scotland. Salmond, a Scotsman, wants to get an Englishman to debate against him. It's as bonkers and stupid an idea as a Yorkshire independence referendum having Geoff Boycott for the separatists and a Lancastrian for the unionists.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Morris_Dancer said:

    I find criticism of Cameron in regard to the Scottish debate gimmick by Salmond to be baffling and ridiculous.

    Either way they win - why wouldnt they go for it?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Morris_Dancer said:

    I find criticism of Cameron in regard to the Scottish debate gimmick by Salmond to be baffling and ridiculous.

    It's a vote by Scots to determine the future of Scotland. Salmond, a Scotsman, wants to get an Englishman to debate against him. It's as bonkers and stupid an idea as a Yorkshire independence referendum having Geoff Boycott for the separatists and a Lancastrian for the unionists.

    Its a massive squirrel to distract from the paucity of the SNP economic arguments.

    one huge massive troll exercise.


  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    R v Adebolajo aka Abu Hamza & Adebowale aka Abdullah is listed for trial at the Central Criminal Court tomorrow before Mr Justice Sweeney and a jury, nine days after the original trial date.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 45,192
    Morris_Dancer said:

    I find criticism of Cameron in regard to the Scottish debate gimmick by Salmond to be baffling and ridiculous.

    It's a vote by Scots to determine the future of Scotland. Salmond, a Scotsman, wants to get an Englishman to debate against him. It's as bonkers and stupid an idea as a Yorkshire independence referendum having Geoff Boycott for the separatists and a Lancastrian for the unionists.

    Any links to Clans Cable, Hammond, Osborne and May?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    TGOHF said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    I find criticism of Cameron in regard to the Scottish debate gimmick by Salmond to be baffling and ridiculous.

    It's a vote by Scots to determine the future of Scotland. Salmond, a Scotsman, wants to get an Englishman to debate against him. It's as bonkers and stupid an idea as a Yorkshire independence referendum having Geoff Boycott for the separatists and a Lancastrian for the unionists.

    Its a massive squirrel to distract from the paucity of the SNP economic arguments.

    one huge massive troll exercise.


    I'm looking forward to Salmond's excuses when the vote fails to go his way.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 47,092
    tim said:

    I'm not sure why anyone expects Cameron to debate Salmond, if he's determined to avoid Farage and reduce the debates with Miliband to a minimum then his minders have obviously decided that he's not very good, the 2010 debates certainly informed that decision.
    And he's flabbier and has been around a lot longer now so it's hardly likely to be an improved fop PM in the ring next time.

    Tim, if you have to resort to calling Cameron 'fop', and going on about his weight, then you have lost the argument.

    I thought Labour were meant to be above such things?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    "Meanwhile with every month that goes by with the polls staying as they Ed gets a bit closer to Number 10."

    Don't have nightmares....good night.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 47,092
    Off-topic, but of indirect relevance to the renewable energy debate:

    There's a proposal for renewable energy storage from a very unusual source:

    http://bldgblog.gizmodo.com/the-british-exploratory-land-archive-1465483958
    http://www.williamsf1.com/Advanced-Engineering/Stationary-Flywheel-Systems/Stationary-Flywheel-Systems/

    Basically, it is a load of humongous flywheels. Initially used to stabilise supplies (to temporarily level out peaks and troughs in demand)

    And from technology originally developed for F1.

    This may not be as ridiculous as it sounds ...
  • DavidBrackenburyDavidBrackenbury Posts: 357
    Life_ina_market_town said:

    R v Adebolajo aka Abu Hamza & Adebowale aka Abdullah is listed for trial at the Central Criminal Court tomorrow before Mr Justice Sweeney and a jury, nine days after the original trial date.

    Why on earth are we giving these people the right to be tried, or named under any of these false names? Their identity is peferctly clear and they should stand trial under the names they have. Only.

    We need give no credence to these publicity stunts and should never have allowed it. Mujahd Abu Hamza?? I think not!

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 47,092
    tim said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    tim said:

    I'm not sure why anyone expects Cameron to debate Salmond, if he's determined to avoid Farage and reduce the debates with Miliband to a minimum then his minders have obviously decided that he's not very good, the 2010 debates certainly informed that decision.
    And he's flabbier and has been around a lot longer now so it's hardly likely to be an improved fop PM in the ring next time.

    Tim, if you have to resort to calling Cameron 'fop', and going on about his weight, then you have lost the argument.

    I thought Labour were meant to be above such things?
    Flabbier has more than one meaning, all of which apply to the Cameron who's has been in situ for eight years next week

    adj -bier, -biest
    1. lacking firmness; loose or yielding flabby muscles
    2. having flabby flesh, esp through being overweight
    3. lacking vitality; weak; ineffectual
    All of which could equally apply to you. (I'm guessing about #2, but as you seem to spend your entire time at a keyboard, it'd be a good bet).
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,895
    Nyooooooooooom!

    Interesting stuff, Mr. Jessop.

    On F1, I hope they get the drivers sorted soon. Oh, and I need to write some post-season pieces too.
  • MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    "Meanwhile with every month that goes by with the polls staying as they Ed gets a bit closer to Number 10."

    Barring any major events, the polls aren't likely to change much until people's personal finances improve (if this happens at all) or the general election starts. Most people aren't currently paying much attention so we're in a current default position where lots of voters don't like the Tories and Lib Dems (surprise surprise).
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If Britain is such a "nasty country", why do many people want to come here?

    Bit of a contradiction...
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,784
    Those odds on Miliband as next PM at 8/11 are slightly better value than the 4/6 available on Labour getting most seats at the next GE. That's because Labour could fail to get most seats yet Miliband could still become PM (a) immediately after the 2015 GE were the LDs to switch sides or (b) if Cameron soldiered on after 2015 and Labour didn't dump Miliband, this being quite a likely outcome if Cameron were governing by C&S without a majority or by a coalition whose ability to command a majority on votes of confidence was on a knife edge and likely to disappear given a few by-elections. By contrast, the chances of Miliband failing to lead Labour into the 2015 GE are negligible.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    My remark was facetious. Without politics what would we talk about?

    More important, what woild we bet on!
    Blue_rog said:

    foxinsoxuk said:

    Having no government for a prolonged period doesnt seem to be the biggest problem for a country. What is the rush for a coalition agreement needed for?

    A suspension or abolition of the govt may even be quite a popular move, though it would reduce domestic political betting opportunities.

    DavidL said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    I like the Boris/Yvette job-share option at 20/1

    Well if you can have a grand Coalition in Germany why not?

    It seemed from the results that this was the only game in town and I recall NickP and others forecasting it almost immediately and yet it has taken 2 months. What a truly remarkable document the Coalition Agreement was.
    Would you really want the Civil Service and Qangos to be running the country in the interim?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2013
    The latest UKPR polling average gives Labour a 6% lead. I think it was 10% this time last year.

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    In fact the UKPR polling average gave Labour a lead of 11% this time last year, so the party's lead has almost halved over the last 12 months:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20121119220034/http://ukpollingreport.co.uk

    Then the figures were Lab 43%, Con 32%, LD 9%.

    Now the figures are Lab 38%, Con 32%, LD 10%.

    Changes: Lab -5%, Con nc, LD +1%.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    @tim - much as Mike Weir has got it wrong - so too has the electorate:

    End free movement of Labour - including Brits abroad: 52
    Keep free movement of Labour: 29

    The only VI group in favour of free movement were LibDems:

    Net keep free movement:
    Con: -39
    Lab: -13
    LibD: +19
    UKIP: -79

    http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/6qiej6gfjs/YG-Archive-131121-Immigration.pdf
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 47,092
    tim said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    tim said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    tim said:

    I'm not sure why anyone expects Cameron to debate Salmond, if he's determined to avoid Farage and reduce the debates with Miliband to a minimum then his minders have obviously decided that he's not very good, the 2010 debates certainly informed that decision.
    And he's flabbier and has been around a lot longer now so it's hardly likely to be an improved fop PM in the ring next time.

    Tim, if you have to resort to calling Cameron 'fop', and going on about his weight, then you have lost the argument.

    I thought Labour were meant to be above such things?
    Flabbier has more than one meaning, all of which apply to the Cameron who's has been in situ for eight years next week

    adj -bier, -biest
    1. lacking firmness; loose or yielding flabby muscles
    2. having flabby flesh, esp through being overweight
    3. lacking vitality; weak; ineffectual
    All of which could equally apply to you. (I'm guessing about #2, but as you seem to spend your entire time at a keyboard, it'd be a good bet).
    Well thats certainly a killer piece of analysis.
    Pot. Kettle. Black.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tombradby: I have no idea why the CPS attacked C4News yesterday. Now they have had to admit the CCTV pix were not edited - and look ridiculous.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    I thought we’d got that clear by now."

    Good point and well made, though it would be interesting to see how many of those 2.2m UK citizens living abroad claim benefits in the countries they live in.

    If its loads then the pro-Europeans could justly make the point that other European countries are paying for our 'spongers' to an even greater extent than we pay for theirs....
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    I live in Italy and never claim benefits... nor do my sister and her husband who also live here.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/channel-4-itn-statement
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    taffys said:

    I thought we’d got that clear by now."

    Good point and well made, though it would be interesting to see how many of those 2.2m UK citizens living abroad claim benefits in the countries they live in.

    If its loads then the pro-Europeans could justly make the point that other European countries are paying for our 'spongers' to an even greater extent than we pay for theirs....

    The retirees to countries (commonly Spain and France) would probably have higher healthcare costs.

    But if you're talking burden of proof, then equally shouldn't those saying that free movement costs money be the ones to do proper comparisons rather than making claims and saying "well you prove it".
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    "Introducing facts into the immigration debate is like teaching a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."

    If we ran the numbers its quite conceivable that the UK actually makes money on the free movements benefits trade, given how many we might have to support if it was ended and they returned home.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Has Angus Reid stopped doing British polling?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Except that when retirees in Spain become seriously ill or need social services, they tend to sell up and return to Blighty. I see it all the time. Retiring abroad tends to be for the newly retired.

    It is worth bearing in mind that Romanians and Bulgarians with Job offers (such as my Romanian medical colleague) can move here freely already, it is those without jobs that cannot come until 1 Jan.

    I was surprised how right wing she is, hating the Communists is no surprise, but she told me that only 4 million Romanians contribute to their health care insurance system, out of 24 millionpeople. She says her country is being ruined by idle Romanians voting themselves bigger benefits and driving anyone with ambition abroad.

    I have her down as a UKIPper!
    taffys said:

    "Introducing facts into the immigration debate is like teaching a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."

    If we ran the numbers its quite conceivable that the UK actually makes money on the free movements benefits trade, given how many we might have to support if it was ended and they returned home.

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    foxinsoxuk said:


    I was surprised how right wing she is, hating the Communists is no surprise, but she told me that only 4 million Romanians contribute to their health care insurance system, out of 24 millionpeople. She says her country is being ruined by idle Romanians voting themselves bigger benefits and driving anyone with ambition abroad.

    I have her down as a UKIPper!

    I'm not sure how that is "right wing"?
    Seems like basic common sense and simple economics to me.

  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    GeoffM said:

    foxinsoxuk said:


    I was surprised how right wing she is, hating the Communists is no surprise, but she told me that only 4 million Romanians contribute to their health care insurance system, out of 24 millionpeople. She says her country is being ruined by idle Romanians voting themselves bigger benefits and driving anyone with ambition abroad.

    I have her down as a UKIPper!

    I'm not sure how that is "right wing"?
    Seems like basic common sense and simple economics to me.

    He who does not work, neither shall he eat?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    I just saw on that biased Jeff Randall, the Conservative Party spokesman on Sky, that the Post Office which was sold on the cheap is also going to receive £640m of government subsidies !

    Good business ! Earn profits by doing nothing.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    tim said:

    "“Freedom of movement is a two-way street,” said Mike Weir (SNP, Angus). “It is estimated that 2.2million United Kingdom citizens are living or working in other parts of the European Union.”
    Silly Mr Weir. Surely he knows the rules of debate on migration. Those 2.2million United Kingdom citizens are not immigrants. Only foreign people who move to Britain are immigrants. British people who move to foreign countries, by contrast, are expats.
    This is a crucial distinction. The former are untrustworthy chancers and spongers, whose movements should as far as possible be restricted. The latter, however, are proud, honest citizens, whose freedom to roam the globe as they see fit must never be curtailed.
    I thought we’d got that clear by now."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10479061/Sketch-Full-Britannia-Britannia-rule-the-waves.html

    Indeed.

    Polish expats = bad. English expats = good.

    Bulgarian expats = bad. English expats = good.

    Arab expats = bad. English expats = good.

    The hypocrisy stinks.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    AndyJS said:

    Has Angus Reid stopped doing British polling?

    The calibre of their clients did for them.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Angus Reid UK polls:

    http://www.angusreidglobal.com/country/united-kingdom/

    1 in October.

    1 in August (IndyRef)

    2 in May

    1 in April

    Obviously struggling.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,263
    In the Telegraph Allister Heath is not impressed by the Cameroons:

    " But equally important are George Osborne and David Cameron’s long-standing lack of interest in either economic policy or political philosophy and their refusal to campaign consistently for free enterprise solutions to our economic and social problems.

    This absence of principles and the intellectual vacuum at the top of the modern Tory party has allowed the debate to drift Leftwards in almost all areas, with the notable exceptions of education and welfare reform. "

    So the intellectual right isn't happy and the populist right isn't happy.

    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973 ?




  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited November 2013
    The hypocrisy stinks.

    Quite. I guess you could make a stronger economic case viz-a-viz non European immigrants, in that there probably aren't many Brits claiming unemployment benefits in non-EU countries, but again it would be interesting to see the numbers. I'm not even sure how many non-EU immigrants claim benefits here....
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Scotland will face the "severest cuts in political history" if voters reject independence, the country's First Minister has claimed.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/fm-scotland-will-face-severest-cuts-in-political-history-if-they-reject-independence.1385568097
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973?

    To put matters in context, many conservatives in 1973 were playing cards around the gaslamp and working a three day week, because Joe Gormley and his miners had turned the lights off via their latest strike. The dockers and railwaymen were probably on the verge of their own stoppages, courtesy of dodgy shows of hands in car parks.

    Inflation was in the high teens and there were foreign exchange controls. People were contemplating sterling doubling as a toilet paper product, manufacturing industry was losing market share hand over fist and the City of London consisted of two down at heel ex-peers operating out of a shed in Billingsgate.

    So its all relative.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Moral Maze — Radio 4, 8pm tonight:

    "Should police be crime fighters or enforcers of social norms?"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03jdw6y

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    edited November 2013
    All these years I've been saying it 'dipLODocus'. When it's diplodOcus? *feels stupid now*

    Post-google edit: phew, you can say it either way.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Lol. Some corkers coming out from Boris this evening. 'Economic equality will never be possible because some people are simply too stupid to get ahead, Boris Johnson has said.' jameskirkup
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Germany and France announce immigrant curbs in the wake of UK moves: FT via BBG...

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Any comments on the fact that the average Labour lead with UKPR is down from 11% this time last year to 6% now?
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    edited November 2013
    another_richard said:

    In the Telegraph Allister Heath is not impressed by the Cameroons:

    " But equally important are George Osborne and David Cameron’s long-standing lack of interest in either economic policy or political philosophy and their refusal to campaign consistently for free enterprise solutions to our economic and social problems.

    This absence of principles and the intellectual vacuum at the top of the modern Tory party has allowed the debate to drift Leftwards in almost all areas, with the notable exceptions of education and welfare reform. "

    So the intellectual right isn't happy and the populist right isn't happy.

    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973 ?




    Intellectuals and economists have been the downfall of many countries. Let common sense prevail.

  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    surbiton said:

    I just saw on that biased Jeff Randall, the Conservative Party spokesman on Sky, that the Post Office which was sold on the cheap is also going to receive £640m of government subsidies !

    Good business ! Earn profits by doing nothing.

    It was The Royal Mail that was sold. The Post Office is a separate organisation which runs the shops on the high street.

  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,263
    taffys said:

    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973?

    To put matters in context, many conservatives in 1973 were playing cards around the gaslamp and working a three day week, because Joe Gormley and his miners had turned the lights off via their latest strike. The dockers and railwaymen were probably on the verge of their own stoppages, courtesy of dodgy shows of hands in car parks.

    Inflation was in the high teens and there were foreign exchange controls. People were contemplating sterling doubling as a toilet paper product, manufacturing industry was losing market share hand over fist and the City of London consisted of two down at heel ex-peers operating out of a shed in Billingsgate.

    So its all relative.

    Indeed.

    In 1973 industrial outout had more than doubled over the previous 25 years (as opposed to falling in the last 25 years), unemployment was below a million, we could still manage the odd monthly trade surplus (something we haven't achieved since early 1988) and the economy grew by over 7%.

    I suppose one thing which hasn't changed is the sense of oozing complacency so many have.

    Though at least that was more understandable back then.
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited November 2013
    perdix said:

    Intellectuals and economists have been the downfall of many countries. Let common sense prevail.

    One of the few valid insights Clifford Geertz ever had was that "common sense" is no more logical, or less ideological than any other philosophy. If "common sense" were allowed to prevail, we would be detaining "terrorist suspects" for 90 days without trial and would have a full-blown prices and incomes policy among other things. Advocating "common sense" is a hallmark of intellectual vacuity, and usually a veil for an ideology which the proponent is unwilling to adhere to openly.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    It is also worth reminding right wing ideologues, that this is a coalition govt, so it is not realistic to have Tory policies red in tooth and claw, the partners are to the left of the Tories, so hence the leanings.

    Cameron and Osborne made 97 seat gains in 2010, the most in any election (apart from 97) for decades. The biggest threat to them increasing this is in-fighting in the party and UKIP.

    perdix said:

    another_richard said:

    In the Telegraph Allister Heath is not impressed by the Cameroons:

    " But equally important are George Osborne and David Cameron’s long-standing lack of interest in either economic policy or political philosophy and their refusal to campaign consistently for free enterprise solutions to our economic and social problems.

    This absence of principles and the intellectual vacuum at the top of the modern Tory party has allowed the debate to drift Leftwards in almost all areas, with the notable exceptions of education and welfare reform. "

    So the intellectual right isn't happy and the populist right isn't happy.

    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973 ?




    Intellectuals and economists have been the downfall of many countries. Let common sense prevail.

  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    On topic (sort of)
    Pardon my French, but
    "will never be" = "le bel wivern"
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,263
    perdix said:

    another_richard said:

    In the Telegraph Allister Heath is not impressed by the Cameroons:

    " But equally important are George Osborne and David Cameron’s long-standing lack of interest in either economic policy or political philosophy and their refusal to campaign consistently for free enterprise solutions to our economic and social problems.

    This absence of principles and the intellectual vacuum at the top of the modern Tory party has allowed the debate to drift Leftwards in almost all areas, with the notable exceptions of education and welfare reform. "

    So the intellectual right isn't happy and the populist right isn't happy.

    Is this how Conservative supporters felt in 1973 ?




    Intellectuals and economists have been the downfall of many countries. Let common sense prevail.

    Well if 'common sense' includes living within your means and not spending money you haven't got on things you don't need that's Cameron and Osborne ruled out then.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Ian Katz tweets: #Newsnight has learned Falkirk whistleblower Linda Gow not included on Labour's all-women shortlist to fight seat
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    No one likes a grass.
    CarlottaVance said:

    Ian Katz tweets: #Newsnight has learned Falkirk whistleblower Linda Gow not included on Labour's all-women shortlist to fight seat

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,789
    Millsy said:

    "Meanwhile with every month that goes by with the polls staying as they Ed gets a bit closer to Number 10."

    Barring any major events, the polls aren't likely to change much until people's personal finances improve (if this happens at all) or the general election starts. Most people aren't currently paying much attention so we're in a current default position where lots of voters don't like the Tories and Lib Dems (surprise surprise).

    It's usually best to measure electoral calendars in significant events rather than months, since most people don't pay much attention in between. Still to come are:
    2 autumn statements
    2 budgets (one of them subject to revision after the election)
    1 round of party conferences (marginally helped Labour this year)
    1 Labour special conference (could work positively or negatively)
    1 Scottish referendum
    An interesting trial or two
    A Euro election (meh)
    An election campaign
    Any black swans

    Looks a big list, but it's not obvious that any of them will alter opinion much, except the Scottish result, in Scotland. Autumn statements rarely have any electoral impact and Budgets tend to be a wash, the common response being "Good for Britain but not for me". Election campaigns rarely shift votes heavily...



  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Just got in so apologies if already posted

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10479461/Spanish-PM-Independent-Scotland-would-be-out-of-the-EU.html
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    Life_ina_market_town said:

    perdix said:

    Intellectuals and economists have been the downfall of many countries. Let common sense prevail.

    One of the few valid insights Clifford Geertz ever had was that "common sense" is no more logical, or less ideological than any other philosophy. If "common sense" were allowed to prevail, we would be detaining "terrorist suspects" for 90 days without trial and would have a full-blown prices and incomes policy among other things. Advocating "common sense" is a hallmark of intellectual vacuity, and usually a veil for an ideology which the proponent is unwilling to adhere to openly.
    I can't agree that having a prices and incomes policy is common sense. It is the fallacy that economists and intellectuals believe that everything can be organised by statute and bureaucracy.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Labour selections are taking place tonight in Guildford and Epsom & Ewell:

    twitter.com/GuildfordLabour
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Scotland will face the "severest cuts in political history" if voters reject independence, the country's First Minister has claimed.

    ROFL

    So much for positive campaigning. Project "Hate the English" going well then...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,792
    Let me entertain you with a new thread
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 28,263
    another_richard said:

    we could still manage the odd monthly trade surplus (something we haven't achieved since early 1988)

    I meant 1998 not 1988.

  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    perdix said:

    I can't agree that having a prices and incomes policy is common sense. It is the fallacy that economists and intellectuals believe that everything can be organised by statute and bureaucracy.

    My point is that anything can under the appropriate circumstances be presented as common sense. A prices and incomes policy was in the 1970s, and opposition to it was dismissed as mere "ideology". There were days when the divine right of kings and the institution of slavery appeared commonsensical.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @Tim

    'Jonathan Portes ‏@jdportes
    How many migrants will curbss on benefits for 3 months affect? Chart of claims within 6 months suggests: not many: pic.twitter.com/Cvrrnqjznb'


    Portes on immigration is about as reliable as Ed Balls on structural deficits.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    "Portugal is set for another tough year after its government approved a new set of budget measures.

    The country is struggling to come back to financial health and meet the terms of an international bailout......

    Public employees earning more than 675 euros (£565, $915) a month will see their pay cut by between 2.5-12%, pensions above a certain amount will be cut by 10% and working hours raised from 35 to 40 hours a week.

    They will also lose three days' holiday a year.

    About 80% of the government workforce, or some 600,000 workers, will be affected."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25112393

    Ireland has done this and now Portugal, when with the UK take this much needed medicine?

This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025