Just a thought on the future of the benefits bill. Mr Pulpstar said up-thread that ~3% isn't that bad. Well, inflation at 3% will halve the value of money in about twenty years. So an ordinary person who has worked hard and managed to save reasonable nest egg and retires at 65 will be driven into penury and the arms of the state before they die. Furthermore a young person trying to save for the future will, unless interest rates become positive again, be running up a down escalator, so why should they bother when the State will provide.
3% inflation sounds OK but only if, politician-like, one thinks in the short term. Over the medium term it is horrible and when combined with negative real interest rates disastrous.
The main benefit of having a cap of course is that once a year the CoTE can decide to raise it by less than inflation.
Policies like this that stop looking at actual needs at some arbitrary point are done for political reasons rather than economic reasons. If you were trying to save money rather than send a message you'd taper the cuts further down the scale.
Since the whole point of the policy is to announce it, nobody would want to extend it by stealth.
by using the phrase "*innocent face*" are you contributing to popular usage and an interpretation that might be used by one side or the other in the forthcoming trial?
....and you thought time travel was paradoxical....
by using the phrase "*innocent face*" are you contributing to popular usage and an interpretation that might be used by one side or the other in the forthcoming trial?
....and you thought time travel was paradoxical....
That's nothing.
If you want a real time travel challenge, try watching Back to the Future with someone from Norfolk and then try and explain to them why Marty McFly shagging his own mum is a bad idea.
@tim how many hundreds of millions of benefits would need to be claimed by economic migrants before you would consider it worthy for discussion or for government consideration?
I think Mr Hodges makes some very salient points about political weather - regardless of the specifics about EdM.
He's by far the most interesting columnist to appear in recent years - entertaining, well linked into his subject and pithy/fast off the mark. The likes of Steve Richards seem very ponderous in comparison. I'm reading End of the Party [thanks to @Financier for the book] and it struck me that I barely see a link to his stuff these days. I used to rather like him when he stuck to writing about Labour - his attempts to understand the Tories always fell flat IMO.
"To be pedantic (which is what this site is for after all), not in 1940-41 when the Blitz took place. I know they were our senior partner in 1940 and everything..."
To be pedantic the USA didn't enter WWII until December 1941.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h Just spoken with Taxpayers Alliance. They're not commenting on the Thatcher Funeral as "it's too partisan" and they don't know costs.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h Taxpayers Alliance also dismiss as "ludicrous" suggestions links with the Tories are why they're silent on Thatcher Funeral costs.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h Obviously nothing else Taxpayers Alliance comment on is "partisan" and they accurately cost everything before speaking.
Some interesting stats re inflation books, newspapers, fruit, veg, health insurance, stamps, gas/elect, airline tickets have all gone up over 6% + tuition fees.
"To be pedantic (which is what this site is for after all), not in 1940-41 when the Blitz took place. I know they were our senior partner in 1940 and everything..."
To be pedantic the USA didn't enter WWII until December 1941.
Yeah, but not everyone knows that..
'Cameron's historic blunder: Fury as PM says we were 'junior partner' to Americans in 1940'
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound 4m Letwin says that in talks Labour was 'acting very much in concert with Hacked Off' and 'unwilling' to do anything without their approval
Given that you're trying to convince me that even on your imaginary stats Eastern European benefit claims make up below 0.05 % of the benefit bill I'll answer your next 1,999 substantive points on welfare before it's time for another one on A8 claimants.
Similarly a post on tatto removal on the NHS is relevant once every few decades.
First of all, I have no ambition to convince you of anything. My only "tim" related ambition is to show how often you are wrong (=very often). Secondly, my "imaginary stats" are the result of something in which you don't seem particularly skilled (=arithmetic). Thirdly, I only mentioned Eastern Europe because you did - I have no problem with immigration from any part of the world particularly; I have a problem with economic migrants who are unable to support themselves and any immigrants who won't obey our laws.
I can only assume from your answer that you are perfectly happy to open our borders to anybody, no matter how much they'll claim from the taxpayer.
Funny that, did they have anything to say about Dave recalling parliament for a day and MP's claiming £3,700 each to get there? Surely they did.
The Taxpayers Alliance is a bloody disgrace.
I don't have the slightest problem with the money being expended on the old girl's funeral but I have a lot of problem with organisations that pretend to be something they are not.
Taxpayers Alliance indeed. Please note that this taxpayer is not in any way, shape or form allied with them and suspects strongly that the TA is nothing but a presure group on behalf of people who don't need one.
An issue of a private company building a nuclear plant is that I suppose is that when the time comes to decommission the plant and clean up they can simply liquidate...
Not sure what the answer is, but the Gov't needs to get a grip on Energy policy pdq. (As will rEd's)
LOL! I actually quite liked the original (Being John Malkovich). Very surreal!
The scene in the restaurant where he peruses a menu offering only "Malkovich", thinks about it, orders "Malkovich" and the waiter says "Malkovich" as if to say "an excellent choice Sir" is my favourite
you are perfectly happy to open our borders to anybody
I think you'll find it was Tory PM's who signed up to free movement of Labour in the EU, not me.
Avoiding the actual point, as usual.
I'll ask again, how many hundreds of millions need to be paid to economic migrants in benefit payments every year before you'd recognise it as a problem?
"To be pedantic (which is what this site is for after all), not in 1940-41 when the Blitz took place. I know they were our senior partner in 1940 and everything..."
To be pedantic the USA didn't enter WWII until December 1941.
Yeah, but not everyone knows that..
'Cameron's historic blunder: Fury as PM says we were 'junior partner' to Americans in 1940'
An issue of a private company building a nuclear plant is that I suppose is that when the time comes to decommission the plant and clean up they can simply liquidate...
Not sure what the answer is, but the Gov't needs to get a grip on Energy policy pdq. (As will rEd's)
There's no chance of Ed Miliband developing an energy policy, yet alone one that gives us energy security. He didn't when he was charge of DECC: there's no reason to think he's learnt his lesson.
Giving the country secure energy supplies at an affordable price is one of the main tasks of any government. It is a task that requires long-term, strategic thinking. He failed.
I'll ask again, how many hundreds of millions need to be paid to economic migrants in benefit payments every year before you'd recognise it as a problem?
And how many billions do we have to pay in taxes before you recognise us as a blessing?
I'll ask again, how many hundreds of millions need to be paid to economic migrants in benefit payments every year before you'd recognise it as a problem?
And how many billions do we have to pay in taxes before you recognise us as a blessing?
I'm very happy with economic migrants who pay taxes and don't claim benefits. Thank you very much indeed Neil.
Edit PS I'm also very happy with my girlfriend being here as an economic migrant from Bulgaria. Not just for the obvious reasons(!), she works full time and owns her own property.
An issue of a private company building a nuclear plant is that I suppose is that when the time comes to decommission the plant and clean up they can simply liquidate...
Not sure what the answer is, but the Gov't needs to get a grip on Energy policy pdq. (As will rEd's)
Shouldn't that be "historical"? I'm sure it's not the only time someone has made that mistake. /pedant
It's not even the only time Cameron made that mistake!
'Even as Downing Street was trying to repair the damage, the PM's error was compounded in a further interview, recorded earlier, with the American network ABC news. He said: 'We were the junior partner in 1940 when we were fighting against Hitler; we are the junior partner now. I think you shouldn't pretend to be something you're not.'
"And how many billions do we have to pay in taxes before you recognise us as a blessing? "
I've priced you up at a case of the black stuff, seven four leaf clovers, a defeat at Murrayfield for Ireland and the permanent deportation of Terry Wogan to Dublin.
I'm not saying it's irrelevant, A8 migrants are according to you 0.05% of the issue, but 100% of your posting today. So come back in 2,000 days time and we'll carry on
The £100m I stated earlier was a conservative estimate of the cost based on the number of Eastern Europeans claiming JSA. For you to calculate that as a percentage of the total benefits (including the state pension ffs) is dishonest or idiotic. If we don't find ways to cut the hundreds of millions we won't find ways to cut the billions. Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves (have you heard that one before?)
Also, I haven't only posted about that today (I can remember at least four posts on other subjects, including one in which I agreed with you), I've persisted on this point because you've persisted with your dishonesty/ignorance (delete as appropriate).
RT @DurraniMix: Rothermere admits @mailonline wd have to go behind paywall if it were just targeting UK environment, but is eyeing global market #shift2013
"And how many billions do we have to pay in taxes before you recognise us as a blessing? "
I've priced you up at a case of the black stuff, seven four leaf clovers, a defeat at Murrayfield for Ireland and the permanent deportation of Terry Wogan to Dublin.
Deal ??
Don't listen to him, Mr. Neil. I'll just take the case of the black stuff; you can hang on the the four leaf clovers, I'll cheer Ireland on at Murrayfield and we will keep Wogan. A much better offer, as I am sure you will agree.
Argentine Ambassador not attending Mrs Thatcher's funeral. Not really a surprise in some respects.
No loss....French sending "Elisabeth Guigou, Socialist MP and head of the parliament foreign affairs committee, will represent France at Thatcher's funeral. She was a close adviser to the president Francois Mitterrand during most of the Thatcher years. In the 1990s she had several cabinet posts including minister for European Affairs and justice minister. No serving French minister is expected to attend the funeral."
"Earlier, Sapa reported Inkatha Freedom Party leader leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi as describing Thatcher's death as "devastating".
"I am devastated by the news of [Baroness] Margaret Thatcher's passing this [Monday] morning," Buthelezi said in a statement.
"She is an iconic figure in world history, being the first female prime minister of the United Kingdom, the woman who reversed her nation's decline following World War II, saw victory in the Falklands War, won three elections, and served her country from 1979 to 1990."
However, first and foremost in Buthelezi's mind, Thatcher remained a friend.
The former prime minister would forever command Buthelezi's respect and admiration, not only for her leadership in the United Kingdom, but also on the global stage.
"She was a voice of reason during apartheid and listened attentively to my plea against sanctions and economic disinvestment, which we both recognised would hurt the poorest of our people the most," the IFP president said.
"I was privileged to visit [Baroness] Thatcher at 10 Downing Street in 1986, and was honoured when she specifically travelled to Ulundi to visit me as the chief minister of the erstwhile KwaZulu government."
He said never before had an international dignitary shown such respect for black leadership. "She displayed all the best features of a trailblazer; the courage of her convictions and a tenacious belief in doing what was necessary and right," he said.
If Labour are on 38% or 39% now I think it's fair to say they'll struggle to get 35% on polling day. Not that the Tories have much chance of reaching 35% either.
With Dave on history and Charles on geography you can see why the invasion of Normandy beaches from Ireland in 1066 was planned and won on the playing fields of Eton.
Given that my ancestors were Normans who led the invasion of Ireland in the 12th century we do know the location of those two bits of coast!
Going back to the ICM poll. While the poll is not great for the Tories I think that it is a terrible poll for labour. Only on 38% as the only opposition party mid term with an unpopular government. They should be on 45% as a minimum
Anecdote. Last nights TV with the women from North London moaning that £500 per week is not enough and her benefits should not be cut has caused a stir in the office today. I do think Labour are on the wrong side of the argument in regard to public opinion on this matter and this could explain this poor poll
The former prime minister would forever command Buthelezi's respect and admiration, not only for her leadership in the United Kingdom, but also on the global stage. "She was a voice of reason during apartheid and listened attentively to my plea against sanctions and economic disinvestment, which we both recognised would hurt the poorest of our people the most," the IFP president said.
What would he know? It's a well known fact that Thatcher supported apartheid - look how she maintained white minority rule in Rhodesia......
One thought around the immigration point (and really just musing).
A huge part of the problem is just one of negative externalities.
Businesses apparently prefer to hire young immigrants vs locals because they are harder-working/more qualified/whatever. Let's take as fact for a moment.
This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created? We do this with carbon, for instance, or planning.
The longer the absence of a claim for responsibility for Boston, surely the more likely its domestic rather than AQ, who are usually pretty prompt to claim responsibility surely?
The ANC certainly carried out terrorist attacks, such as placing bombs outside a restaurant in Durban in 1986 (three killed, 76 injured), in a shopping centre in Amanzimtoti in 1985 (five killed, 40 injured), and in Church Street, Pretoria in 1983 (19 killed, 200 wounded).
Most Western countries, including the USA and Canada, officially classified the ANC as a terrorist organisation.
The British Dream: Successes and Failures of Post-War Immigration, by David Goodhart,
Britain has undergone a demographic revolution, Goodhart shows. More immigrants now come each year than arrived in all the nine centuries between 1066 and 1950. Most of the postwar influx dates only from the last decade and a half. It began as soon as Tony Blair came to power. Net immigration nearly tripled, from 48,000 in 1997 to 140,000 the following year, and kept rising. “In 30 years’ time,” Goodhart writes, “New Labour’s immigration policy will almost certainly be seen as its primary legacy.”
This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created? We do this with carbon, for instance, or planning.
You've got your negative externalities upside down. The negative externality is caused by the local being uneducatated, demotivated and given perverse incentives by the welfare system. It would be bonkers to penalise the company for these failures which are completely outside its control, just as it would be bonkers to penalise a company for not buying British goods if there were superior alternatives available from other countries.
Some interesting stats re inflation books, newspapers, fruit, veg, health insurance, stamps, gas/elect, airline tickets have all gone up over 6% + tuition fees.
The car insurance one is particularly noteworthy. The ruling from the European Court of Justice outlawing the use of gender to establish risk, and therefore offer lower premiums to women and higher premiums to men, had been widely expected to lead to higher premiums overall. See this Telegraph article for example.
This came in at the start of the year, and I remember it creating vast reams of online debate in various places, but it hasn't turned out the way that most people expected.
@Bobajob No. The event that's got everyone excited is the emergence of the Blairite Greek chorus. It's about three days late, but the commentariat got there eventually.
If there is anything of interest in this ICM poll, it's that Ed Miliband's personal ratings have dived, while George Osborne has seen his ratings improve considerably. But we'll have to see whether that is just a one-off.
David Goodhart's immigration article and book are getting a lot of coverage at the moment which is no bad thing. Rod Liddle wrote an amusing review of it in the Sunday Times book section a few days ago.
@Bobajob No. The event that's got everyone excited is the emergence of the Blairite Greek chorus. It's about three days late, but the commentariat got there eventually.
If there is anything of interest in this ICM poll, it's that Ed Miliband's personal ratings have dived, while George Osborne has seen his ratings improve considerably. But we'll have to see whether that is just a one-off.
I wasn't aware ICM even did authoritative personal ratings. Isn't that Mori?
"This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created?"
Indeed, Mr. Charles, and I have been saying something similar for years. When I worked in The Oman my work permit was only granted after the people I went to work for had shown that the skills I was bringing could not be found in-country and how there would be a skills transfer to the locals so that the job I was there to do would in future be done by a native Omani. There was also an additional tax-charge raised because they were employing a foreign national, and needless to say I had no right of residence or access to any state-provided benefits (my employer provided housing, health insurance, etc.). For non-EU types I can't see why similar rules couldn't be introduced here. If they were non-EU immigration could be reduced to zero, whilst allowing companies that genuinely needed to bring in skilled people to do so.
The ANC certainly carried out terrorist attacks, such as placing bombs outside a restaurant in Durban in 1986 (three killed, 76 injured), in a shopping centre in Amanzimtoti in 1985 (five killed, 40 injured), and in Church Street, Pretoria in 1983 (19 killed, 200 wounded).
Most Western countries, including the USA and Canada, officially classified the ANC as a terrorist organisation.
@Bobajob Don't put your faith in any single pollster for anything. Tim is very keen on MORI for personal ratings and our host regards ICM as the gold standard for party polling, but neither is infallible or anything like. The trend is usually what to watch with any given pollster.
Personally, I take all polls with a great degree of scepticism individually and only cautious interest collectively.
With Dave on history and Charles on geography you can see why the invasion of Normandy beaches from Ireland in 1066 was planned and won on the playing fields of Eton.
Given that my ancestors were Normans who led the invasion of Ireland in the 12th century we do know the location of those two bits of coast!
tim
If Charles's knowledge of history and geography can pass down accurately through over 50 generations, surely you should rethink your opposition to Sir Mark Thatcher being a suitable heir to his mother?
The ANC certainly carried out terrorist attacks, such as placing bombs outside a restaurant in Durban in 1986 (three killed, 76 injured), in a shopping centre in Amanzimtoti in 1985 (five killed, 40 injured), and in Church Street, Pretoria in 1983 (19 killed, 200 wounded).
Most Western countries, including the USA and Canada, officially classified the ANC as a terrorist organisation.
So the USA and Canada called the ANC "terrorists" but recognised the government run by the "terrorists". So, what changed in 2012 ?
Tells a lot about the efficiency of the Canadian government !
The ANC were only liberating their own country !
Presumably, the Resistance in France were also terrorists !
You can't apply the logic of today to yesteryear.
ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm] noun 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
The ANC fitted definition 1., and 2.
It was an accurate descriptor of the actions of some members of the ANC.
A different question is the validity of the established government that they were using terrorist actions against.
A valid question is how to use language to gain access to and influence over the SA government of the day. By declaring ANC as friendly viciously oppressed freedom fighters, you may find you path to Pretoria a bit rocky.
If you don't include context in your thoughts, they become somewhat detached from reality.
Some interesting stats re inflation books, newspapers, fruit, veg, health insurance, stamps, gas/elect, airline tickets have all gone up over 6% + tuition fees.
The car insurance one is particularly noteworthy. The ruling from the European Court of Justice outlawing the use of gender to establish risk, and therefore offer lower premiums to women and higher premiums to men, had been widely expected to lead to higher premiums overall. See this Telegraph article for example.
This came in at the start of the year, and I remember it creating vast reams of online debate in various places, but it hasn't turned out the way that most people expected.
There was a report the other day about driving in the UK declining, due to the price of fuel. That would presumably have an impact on the insurance market.
One thought around the immigration point (and really just musing).
A huge part of the problem is just one of negative externalities.
Businesses apparently prefer to hire young immigrants vs locals because they are harder-working/more qualified/whatever. Let's take as fact for a moment.
This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created? We do this with carbon, for instance, or planning.
I do not think such charging would be consistent with our membership of the single market. It would be an unfair incentive on firms to hire local labour.
What I found particularly frustrating in the late 90s was when the farmers around here gradually all moved from employing local people to bringing in groups of students from eastern European countries.
Picking raspberries, strawberries and even potatoes is not difficult, just hard work, especially the last one. Speaking to farming clients they were unanimous that locals were just not reliable enough, diligent enough, did not do a sufficiently thorough job and it was worth the additional cost of providing free accomodation to these students.
When I was at school this was a major source of income during the summer holidays and it was actually a good laugh except when it rained. It taught the importance and discipline of hard work. Today's youngsters really miss out. Even those that are keen will now struggle to find any opportunities.
"What would he know? It's a well known fact that Thatcher supported apartheid -"
Well it's a well known fact that Buthelezi was an implacable enemy of the ANC and communism and was reckoned by many to be responsible for the necklace campaign that killed thousands. It isn't a surprise he was welcomed by Thatcher who shared his enmity to Mandela the ANC and even communism.
This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created? We do this with carbon, for instance, or planning.
You've got your negative externalities upside down. The negative externality is caused by the local being uneducatated, demotivated and given perverse incentives by the welfare system. It would be bonkers to penalise the company for these failures which are completely outside its control, just as it would be bonkers to penalise a company for not buying British goods if there were superior alternatives available from other countries.
Absolutely education is a failure of the government to make sure that people are fit for work & that is something which they absolutely must address - I think that Gove's reforms will at least create an environment where this can happen. Similarly the welfare system creates peverse incentives and should (& is) being addressed.
From a strictly economic perspective, though, the negative externality is the result of the hiring decision of the company imposing a cost on the rest of society. May be subsidising is just the easiest way (perhaps as simple as paying the company a percentage of the benefits the individual would receive (say 75% year one, 50% year 2, 25% year 3, repayable if they are sacked within 3 years of the last payment)? Just trying to think if there is a more creative way.
The perspective I am coming from is that a company can only flourish in the long-term (multi-generational) as part of a thriving community. Purists claim that companies should be entirely distinct from the society in which they exist, but I'm not sure this is either realistic or healthy.
The research shows that immigrants raise educational and economic performance,not just overall but among the host community.
Basic free market economics, and the London schools case is the classic example.
Exactly my point.
But the cost - of large number of (perhaps less skilled/motivated/whatever) Brits - is borne by society as a whole.
According to your approach (reductio ad absurbum) it would make sense to import all necessary workers and to leave all natives unemployed & on benefits because this would create the greatest value for the economy.
"This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created?"
Indeed, Mr. Charles, and I have been saying something similar for years. When I worked in The Oman my work permit was only granted after the people I went to work for had shown that the skills I was bringing could not be found in-country and how there would be a skills transfer to the locals so that the job I was there to do would in future be done by a native Omani. There was also an additional tax-charge raised because they were employing a foreign national, and needless to say I had no right of residence or access to any state-provided benefits (my employer provided housing, health insurance, etc.). For non-EU types I can't see why similar rules couldn't be introduced here. If they were non-EU immigration could be reduced to zero, whilst allowing companies that genuinely needed to bring in skilled people to do so.
Much of what you say (skills not being found in-EU, no recourse to state benefits) also applied when my wife (American) had a work permit for this country. So may be it's just a question of applying the rules rather than creating new rules?
Comments
3% inflation sounds OK but only if, politician-like, one thinks in the short term. Over the medium term it is horrible and when combined with negative real interest rates disastrous.
Since the whole point of the policy is to announce it, nobody would want to extend it by stealth.
by using the phrase "*innocent face*" are you contributing to popular usage and an interpretation that might be used by one side or the other in the forthcoming trial?
....and you thought time travel was paradoxical....
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100212342/ed-miliband-is-right-saying-were-right-the-voters-are-wrong-is-no-way-to-win-an-election-so-why-is-he-saying-it/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
If you want a real time travel challenge, try watching Back to the Future with someone from Norfolk and then try and explain to them why Marty McFly shagging his own mum is a bad idea.
He's by far the most interesting columnist to appear in recent years - entertaining, well linked into his subject and pithy/fast off the mark. The likes of Steve Richards seem very ponderous in comparison. I'm reading End of the Party [thanks to @Financier for the book] and it struck me that I barely see a link to his stuff these days. I used to rather like him when he stuck to writing about Labour - his attempts to understand the Tories always fell flat IMO.
"To be pedantic (which is what this site is for after all), not in 1940-41 when the Blitz took place. I know they were our senior partner in 1940 and everything..."
To be pedantic the USA didn't enter WWII until December 1941.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h
Just spoken with Taxpayers Alliance. They're not commenting on the Thatcher Funeral as "it's too partisan" and they don't know costs.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h
Taxpayers Alliance also dismiss as "ludicrous" suggestions links with the Tories are why they're silent on Thatcher Funeral costs.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 1h
Obviously nothing else Taxpayers Alliance comment on is "partisan" and they accurately cost everything before speaking.
Gerry Braiden @GerryBraiden 9m
Look who's speaking at a Baroness Thatcher tribute event on funeral day. It's Matthew Sinclair of Taxpayers Alliance. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100212016/funeral/ …
Only car/home insurance, digital cameras and secondhand cars have fallen. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9997222/The-goods-keeping-inflation-stubbornly-high.html?frame=2381661
http://stephentall.org/2013/04/16/lib-dems-libel-reform-retreat-points-to-a-wider-coalition-problem/?wt=2
JackofKent tweets:
#McAlpine v #Bercow: judge orders seperate hearings for meaning and quantum, but all to take place before end of July.
'Cameron's historic blunder: Fury as PM says we were 'junior partner' to Americans in 1940'
http://tinyurl.com/3yjj2qc
Tim Shipman @ShippersUnbound 4m
Letwin says that in talks Labour was 'acting very much in concert with Hacked Off' and 'unwilling' to do anything without their approval
I can only assume from your answer that you are perfectly happy to open our borders to anybody, no matter how much they'll claim from the taxpayer.
I don't have the slightest problem with the money being expended on the old girl's funeral but I have a lot of problem with organisations that pretend to be something they are not.
Taxpayers Alliance indeed. Please note that this taxpayer is not in any way, shape or form allied with them and suspects strongly that the TA is nothing but a presure group on behalf of people who don't need one.
To nuclear ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22164245
Or not ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-21298117
An issue of a private company building a nuclear plant is that I suppose is that when the time comes to decommission the plant and clean up they can simply liquidate...
Not sure what the answer is, but the Gov't needs to get a grip on Energy policy pdq. (As will rEd's)
I'll ask again, how many hundreds of millions need to be paid to economic migrants in benefit payments every year before you'd recognise it as a problem?
https://twitter.com/ScottFilmCritic/status/323474951006990336/photo/1
Giving the country secure energy supplies at an affordable price is one of the main tasks of any government. It is a task that requires long-term, strategic thinking. He failed.
Edit PS I'm also very happy with my girlfriend being here as an economic migrant from Bulgaria. Not just for the obvious reasons(!), she works full time and owns her own property.
'Even as Downing Street was trying to repair the damage, the PM's error was compounded in a further interview, recorded earlier, with the American network ABC news.
He said: 'We were the junior partner in 1940 when we were fighting against Hitler; we are the junior partner now. I think you shouldn't pretend to be something you're not.'
http://tinyurl.com/3yjj2qc
"And how many billions do we have to pay in taxes before you recognise us as a blessing? "
I've priced you up at a case of the black stuff, seven four leaf clovers, a defeat at Murrayfield for Ireland and the permanent deportation of Terry Wogan to Dublin.
Deal ??
Also, I haven't only posted about that today (I can remember at least four posts on other subjects, including one in which I agreed with you), I've persisted on this point because you've persisted with your dishonesty/ignorance (delete as appropriate).
You've sold yourself cheaply, I would have gone as far as a Jacobite restoration!
"Earlier, Sapa reported Inkatha Freedom Party leader leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi as describing Thatcher's death as "devastating".
"I am devastated by the news of [Baroness] Margaret Thatcher's passing this [Monday] morning," Buthelezi said in a statement.
"She is an iconic figure in world history, being the first female prime minister of the United Kingdom, the woman who reversed her nation's decline following World War II, saw victory in the Falklands War, won three elections, and served her country from 1979 to 1990."
However, first and foremost in Buthelezi's mind, Thatcher remained a friend.
The former prime minister would forever command Buthelezi's respect and admiration, not only for her leadership in the United Kingdom, but also on the global stage.
"She was a voice of reason during apartheid and listened attentively to my plea against sanctions and economic disinvestment, which we both recognised would hurt the poorest of our people the most," the IFP president said.
"I was privileged to visit [Baroness] Thatcher at 10 Downing Street in 1986, and was honoured when she specifically travelled to Ulundi to visit me as the chief minister of the erstwhile KwaZulu government."
He said never before had an international dignitary shown such respect for black leadership. "She displayed all the best features of a trailblazer; the courage of her convictions and a tenacious belief in doing what was necessary and right," he said.
http://www.fbi.gov/boston/press-releases/2013/fbi-assists-boston-police-department-regarding-the-explosions-along-the-marathon-route-and-remains-on-scene
Anecdote. Last nights TV with the women from North London moaning that £500 per week is not enough and her benefits should not be cut has caused a stir in the office today. I do think Labour are on the wrong side of the argument in regard to public opinion on this matter and this could explain this poor poll
GMS:
CDU/CSU: 42%
SPD: 24%
Green: 13%
Linke: 8%
FDP: 6%
Pirates: 2%
Others: 5%
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/index.htm
A huge part of the problem is just one of negative externalities.
Businesses apparently prefer to hire young immigrants vs locals because they are harder-working/more qualified/whatever. Let's take as fact for a moment.
This may be good for the company, but it imposes significant costs on society (unemployment, culture, etc). Rather than subsidising the local, surely we should consider making the business contribute to the negative costs that their actions have created? We do this with carbon, for instance, or planning.
Most Western countries, including the USA and Canada, officially classified the ANC as a terrorist organisation.
Canada continued to do so until 2012:
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-set-to-lift-entry-ban-on-anc-members/article550379/?service=mobile
And the US until at least 2008:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-04-30-watchlist_N.htm
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/court-of-appeal-dismisses-human-rights-challenge-to-immigration-rule
The British Dream: Successes and Failures of Post-War Immigration, by David Goodhart,
Britain has undergone a demographic revolution, Goodhart shows. More immigrants now come each year than arrived in all the nine centuries between 1066 and 1950. Most of the postwar influx dates only from the last decade and a half. It began as soon as Tony Blair came to power. Net immigration nearly tripled, from 48,000 in 1997 to 140,000 the following year, and kept rising. “In 30 years’ time,” Goodhart writes, “New Labour’s immigration policy will almost certainly be seen as its primary legacy.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6eea332e-a1ce-11e2-8971-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2Qd16EZdu
Might give some food for thought.
This came in at the start of the year, and I remember it creating vast reams of online debate in various places, but it hasn't turned out the way that most people expected.
If there is anything of interest in this ICM poll, it's that Ed Miliband's personal ratings have dived, while George Osborne has seen his ratings improve considerably. But we'll have to see whether that is just a one-off.
Labour with only a six point lead with the gold standard is merely the cherry on the parfait.
Indeed, Mr. Charles, and I have been saying something similar for years. When I worked in The Oman my work permit was only granted after the people I went to work for had shown that the skills I was bringing could not be found in-country and how there would be a skills transfer to the locals so that the job I was there to do would in future be done by a native Omani. There was also an additional tax-charge raised because they were employing a foreign national, and needless to say I had no right of residence or access to any state-provided benefits (my employer provided housing, health insurance, etc.). For non-EU types I can't see why similar rules couldn't be introduced here. If they were non-EU immigration could be reduced to zero, whilst allowing companies that genuinely needed to bring in skilled people to do so.
'Less than a quarter of the 4m post-1997 newcomers come from the European Union. Most are from Africa and Asia.'
Tells a lot about the efficiency of the Canadian government !
The ANC were only liberating their own country !
Presumably, the Resistance in France were also terrorists !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22165997
Not very likely, I suspect.
Personally, I take all polls with a great degree of scepticism individually and only cautious interest collectively.
If Charles's knowledge of history and geography can pass down accurately through over 50 generations, surely you should rethink your opposition to Sir Mark Thatcher being a suitable heir to his mother?
ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm] noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
The ANC fitted definition 1., and 2.
It was an accurate descriptor of the actions of some members of the ANC.
A different question is the validity of the established government that they were using terrorist actions against.
A valid question is how to use language to gain access to and influence over the SA government of the day. By declaring ANC as friendly viciously oppressed freedom fighters, you may find you path to Pretoria a bit rocky.
If you don't include context in your thoughts, they become somewhat detached from reality.
I recommend you go with the PB flow and treat polls favouring the Tories with the deepest respect and question the methodologies of all others.
It may not improve your bank balance but you will undoubtedly find greater happiness.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9946655/Petrol-sales-plummet-to-lowest-level-since-1990.html
What I found particularly frustrating in the late 90s was when the farmers around here gradually all moved from employing local people to bringing in groups of students from eastern European countries.
Picking raspberries, strawberries and even potatoes is not difficult, just hard work, especially the last one. Speaking to farming clients they were unanimous that locals were just not reliable enough, diligent enough, did not do a sufficiently thorough job and it was worth the additional cost of providing free accomodation to these students.
When I was at school this was a major source of income during the summer holidays and it was actually a good laugh except when it rained. It taught the importance and discipline of hard work. Today's youngsters really miss out. Even those that are keen will now struggle to find any opportunities.
Let's hope the May local elections are a triumph for them, or they might just look like idiots.
Again. ;^)
Well it's a well known fact that Buthelezi was an implacable enemy of the ANC and communism and was reckoned by many to be responsible for the necklace campaign that killed thousands. It isn't a surprise he was welcomed by Thatcher who shared his enmity to Mandela the ANC and even communism.
From a strictly economic perspective, though, the negative externality is the result of the hiring decision of the company imposing a cost on the rest of society. May be subsidising is just the easiest way (perhaps as simple as paying the company a percentage of the benefits the individual would receive (say 75% year one, 50% year 2, 25% year 3, repayable if they are sacked within 3 years of the last payment)? Just trying to think if there is a more creative way.
The perspective I am coming from is that a company can only flourish in the long-term (multi-generational) as part of a thriving community. Purists claim that companies should be entirely distinct from the society in which they exist, but I'm not sure this is either realistic or healthy.
But the cost - of large number of (perhaps less skilled/motivated/whatever) Brits - is borne by society as a whole.
According to your approach (reductio ad absurbum) it would make sense to import all necessary workers and to leave all natives unemployed & on benefits because this would create the greatest value for the economy.