Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited January 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s comments on pensioner benefits is in this table

It is any wonder that pensioners perks are being protected when you look at this breakdown of 2010 voting & turnout pic.twitter.com/7Ng00o1UHG

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    "The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s comments on pensioner benefits is in this table"

    What confusion would this be?

    The comical Cameroonian spinners were adamant that there is nothing more vile, deserving of failure and opportunistic than populist posturing when little Ed attempted to form a policy on an energy price freeze. It was also grossly irresponsible because as we all know "there is no money left." Meanwhile the PB Romneys will lose no time at all telling you that it is evil socialism or indeed communism to pander to certain groups of voters, as long as it's the ones they appear to loathe in the public sector. They would also warn you of the inherent wickedness of throwing yet more money at welfare, but pensions aren't welfare, well... just because.

    *chortle*

    It's a pledge and like all Cast Iron Pledges just making it hardly means everyone is going to believe it.


    It's also a pledge based on monitoring economic benchmarks and percentages which will have little to no real salience for anyone not obsessed with politics or economics. You either feel better off or you don't and no amount of statistics will truly persuade those who don't. Idiot spinners spouting statistics in an effort to tell the voter "they've never had it so good" are far more likely to anger voters if they feel the opposite.

    And as anotherDave already pointed out,
    OAPs reliant on the state pension are a group UKIP does better than the Conservaties with.

    "LORD ASHCROFT POLL

    RETIRED VOTER ON STATE PENSION

    #UKIP 32.93%
    #LABOUR 32.32%
    #CONSERVATIVES 29%
    #LIBDEMS 5.75%"

    twitter.com/UKELECTIONS2015/statuses/419820398335635456
    So if it's a pledge every party can very easily make then it's usefulness as a political campaigning tool is at an end. Unless there is a massive built in advantage for one party to make it rather than another. Which, as we can see, there is not.

  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    The discussion on teaching methods and quality in the previous thread reminds me of my history teacher at school when I was 9. I have probably told this anecdote before, but anyway:

    We were learning about the Tudors. The teacher had drawn the family tree on the blackboard. He pointed to Mary and asked "What title was she known as?".

    I answered "Mary the first". He said "No."
    Another boy answered "Mary Queen of Scots". He said "Yes".

    I was only about 80% sure that he was wrong, and that Mary Tudor & Mary Queen of Scots were two different people, but I wasn't 100% certain and I didn't challenge him or answer back. I have always regretted since then that I didn't.

    On another occasion I wrote in my exercise book that Queen Elizabeth I was born in 1533; he crossed it out and wrote "1558". I wasn't quick-witted enough to ask him how a child had come to be born 11 years after the death of her father and 22 years after the execution of her mother.

    He also taught music and geography as well as history; I guess that his main qualifications were in music.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    FPT:
    Gaius said:

    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    'More importantly for PB Farage makes clear in his second short piece that he will not decide where he intends to stand at the GE until after the Euro elections in May.'

    Who can blame him, he can't afford another Buckingham shambles..

    I don't khow why you think Buckingham was a shambles.

    Look at it from Faranges pont of view, he has to keep standing somewhere which he doesn't expect to win simply to get the profile of his party up until they start to gain traction. Buckingham was pretty ideal in that lab/libdems were not standing.

    Now that UKIP have traction he has already (I assume) started to look at where he can stand and win.

    In Buckingham, Farage did not only get (roundly) beaten by the speaker, he also got beaten by John Stevens, the former leader of the pro-European Conservative Party.

    I personally entered into two bets with Jonathan Arnott, the UKIP General Secretary regarding Buckingham, and the result. He bet that (a) Farage would win at 7/2, and that (b) Bercow would not get more than 50% more votes than Farage. He lost both bets.

    You are rewriting history because it suits your narrative.
  • GaiusGaius Posts: 227
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:



    In Buckingham, Farage did not only get (roundly) beaten by the speaker, he also got beaten by John Stevens, the former leader of the pro-European Conservative Party.

    I personally entered into two bets with Jonathan Arnott, the UKIP General Secretary regarding Buckingham, and the result. He bet that (a) Farage would win at 7/2, and that (b) Bercow would not get more than 50% more votes than Farage. He lost both bets.

    You are rewriting history because it suits your narrative.

    So what, he was hardly going to win. To get traction for his party he needed to stand in a high profile seat, running against the speaker was a reasonable choice. This reasoning stands even if Farage was deluded enough to actually think he COULD win.

    Your betting history is irrelevant.

    And considering that you don't know what my narritive is, that is clearly bollocks as well.

  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    Benedict Brogan in the Daily Telegraph - What Number 10 really thinks of the Gove v Clegg feud

    "Amid the blasts and counter-blasts two charges stand out: Mr Clegg's – that Mr Gove is too 'ideological'; and Mr Gove's, that the Deputy PM isn't telling the truth. Check with their colleagues and a number of clear impressions emerge. First, Mr Gove is indeed ideological. In fact, that's why so many admire him. There is something heartening about having a minister who believes in something, and who advances his argument at every opportunity. He stands out because he is in a minority of principled politicians in a sea of opportunistic careerists who would sell their grandmothers if it helped to keep them in red boxes. Michael Gove brings some old fashioned Tory belief to the work of Government, and politics is the better for it. Second, Mr Gove is not altogether collegiate. His interests range beyond his brief and he likes to stir trouble, particularly for Lib Dems. Why? Again, because he believes in things and one of the things he believes in is crushing Lib Dems at every opportunity. He is in Coalition with them, but wants to destroy them, just as they want to destroy him. He is not one to keep his nose in his brief and keep out of the wider politics of Government. Good thing too. Third, if Team Gove is prepared to accuse Mr Clegg of 'lying', things are serious, surely? But who is telling the truth? Bit of both. Mr Clegg is right that Mr Gove generates heat. His department is a troublemaker, rather than a backwater. But given the trouble the Lib Dems have been causing by trying to force greater differentiation, it's a bit pot/kettle/black."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    I'm not entirely sure that making cast-iron guarantees to us OAP's that we'll be protected no matter what won't backfire. We have children in mid-life and grandchildren. Some of the latter are still in education, some are trying to find work. Or if they have work, their friends are struggling. Some of us wonder whether we should be so protected, whatever happens to anyone else.
    Of course, if he doesn't make the same pledge over all our other benefits then that might be different!
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    edited January 2014
    Daily Telegraph - Union leader urges Labour to back HS2

    Boris Johnson in the Daily Telegraph - Germany started the Great War, but the Left can’t bear to say so

    TwitterKevin Maguire ‏@Kevin_Maguire 9m
    Dave's barrister bro Alex Cameron backing today's legal aid strike. Relief one member of that family values solidarity and public services

    Sun Politics ‏@Sun_Politics 13m
    EXCL: Road to No10.. 91% back party that will fill the UK's potholes - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5359418/nine-out-of-ten-voters-back-party-that-fills-potholes.html

    Sun Politics ‏@Sun_Politics 16m
    PM hints at ending rich OAP benefits - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5359403/PM-David-Cameron-hints-at-ending-rich-OAP-benefits.html

    Sun Politics ‏@Sun_Politics 18m
    Osborne tax cut pledge - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5359759/George-Osborne-to-pledge-more-tax-cuts-in-2014-to-be-paid-for-by-more-spending-cuts.html
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited January 2014
    BBC accused of bias on immigration... by its own political editor:

    Nick Robinson said that during Labour’s years in government, BBC executives feared an uncensored debate about the issue would stoke racism. - As a result, viewers’ concerns about pressure on jobs and wages, and cultural tensions were not aired as the BBC ‘had decided these are not acceptable views – and that was a terrible mistake’.

    I’ve often wondered why BBC TV debates regularly appear entirely comprised of likeminded bods agreeing with themselves. - can’t have dissenting voices once the aunty's ‘executives’ have made up their minds. Gobsmacked.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2534366/BBC-accused-bias-immigration-political-editor-Nick-Robinson-says-Corporation-terrible-mistakes-not-reflecting-publics-concerns.html#comments
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Hell of a split between men and women aged 25-34. And oddly the two genders flip for under 25s.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    edited January 2014
    Daily Telegraph - 30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends
    " Less than a third of Scots want to leave the United Kingdom, according to an opinion poll published today as the phoney war over independence ends and the battle to win this year’s referendum starts in earnest.

    Better Together, the pro-UK campaign, published a survey showing support for separation has stagnated at 30 per cent despite Alex Salmond recently unveiling his long-awaited blueprint for separation.

    Support for remaining in the UK is more than twice as high (61 per cent), according to the You Gov poll, and more than third of Scots who voted SNP in the 2011 Holyrood election are opposed to independence."
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    This could be a bit of a political ticking time bomb for the SNP in the run up to the next Holyrood elections.
    STV News - Teachers 'angry and frustrated' with new National exam structure
    "Increased workloads for teachers caused by the new National exams are impacting on Scottish pupils' lessons, educators have warned.

    The EIS union said it was seeing an "unprecedented" level of concern from teachers frustrated with the amount of administration needed to deliver the exams.

    Many teachers have also expressed concerns that the extra pressure will have a negative impact on lessons, the union said.

    The first set of students taught the new qualification will sit exams in the spring but teachers have cited a lack of support from the body that developed the changes.

    In a survey carried out by the EIS, they raised concerns over poor quality materials provided by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA), frequent revisions to guideline documents and the "cumbersome" assessment process."
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    edited January 2014
    And just for Avery, more retail sales news. I wonder if Santa gave him a festive Ossie jumper or onesie. :)

    Twitter
    Douglas Fraser ‏@BBCDouglasF 3m
    Asda not giving overall Christmas figures but hit £5m per day in online groceries, 21 & 22 Dec. Xmas sweaters & onesies "incredibly popular"

    Douglas Fraser ‏@BBCDouglasF 7m
    Asda says it "held its nerve" through tough Christmas trading, with "no gimmicks". Says that paid off, while others "hit panic button"
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    The row between Tony Robinson and Michael Gove reminds me that Tony Robinson once gave me £1.

    I was in Parliament Square, doing a demonstration about something-or-other, when Tony Robinson and a TV crew came along filming a documentary programme about the history of the development of the law. As I understand it, contract law meant that I had to be paid something in order for them to have my consent to be filmed, just in case I was in the background of the eventual programme (I wasn't, by the way).

    Tony Robinson is shorter than me in the same way that Tom Daley is taller than me.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,753
    On topic, I am not sure what the confusion is supposed to be. Cameron has committed to the continuation of the triple lock on pensions. Labour's spokeman was on the radio yesterday stating that although he could not make the commitment this was their "direction of travel". It seems likely that all 3 parties will be committed to the triple lock by the election.

    Pensioners, particularly that blessed generation who got final salary scheme pensions, include many of the better off in our society but also include many that are poor. The current set up, like all universal benefits (a point acknowledged by this government in relation to CB), is extremely expensive and inefficient in providing benefits to the poor that need them and spends absurd amounts of money on those that don't.

    But it is simplistic to point to the cynical calculation highlighted by OGH. The real problem is that pensioners genuinely believe that they bought their right to a state pension by paying NI over their working lives. That lie, by politicians of all parties who spent the NI and made no provision for pensions, has come home to roost. It is very difficult for the current generation of politicians who are holding the parcel when it stops ticking to do much about that.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Yay! Socrates is back. Welcome back Socrates
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited January 2014
    fitalass said:

    Daily Telegraph - 30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends
    " Less than a third of Scots want to leave the United Kingdom, according to an opinion poll published today as the phoney war over independence ends and the battle to win this year’s referendum starts in earnest.

    Better Together, the pro-UK campaign, published a survey showing support for separation has stagnated at 30 per cent despite Alex Salmond recently unveiling his long-awaited blueprint for separation.

    Support for remaining in the UK is more than twice as high (61 per cent), according to the You Gov poll, and more than third of Scots who voted SNP in the 2011 Holyrood election are opposed to independence."

    *tears of laughter etc.*

    You didn't understand the poll then?

    Here's someone who did.
    Anti-independence campaign shoot themselves in the foot by publishing YouGov poll that shows Scots are overwhelmingly opposed to the constitutional status quo

    Incomprehensibly, 'Better Together' - the campaign that is fighting to maintain the constitutional status quo - has just published a YouGov poll revealing that the status quo is the least popular of three constitutional options...

    More powers for the Scottish Parliament - 32%
    Full independence - 30%
    Status quo - 29%

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/
    fitalass said:

    This could be a bit of a political ticking time bomb for the SNP in the run up to the next Holyrood elections.

    As big a political ticking time bomb as your curiously oft delayed scottish tory surge? :)

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Gaius said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:



    In Buckingham, Farage did not only get (roundly) beaten by the speaker, he also got beaten by John Stevens, the former leader of the pro-European Conservative Party.

    I personally entered into two bets with Jonathan Arnott, the UKIP General Secretary regarding Buckingham, and the result. He bet that (a) Farage would win at 7/2, and that (b) Bercow would not get more than 50% more votes than Farage. He lost both bets.

    You are rewriting history because it suits your narrative.

    So what, he was hardly going to win. To get traction for his party he needed to stand in a high profile seat, running against the speaker was a reasonable choice. This reasoning stands even if Farage was deluded enough to actually think he COULD win.

    Your betting history is irrelevant.

    And considering that you don't know what my narritive is, that is clearly bollocks as well.

    The point about my betting history is that it was with the GenSec of UKIP. A man who clearly did think that Farage could win.

  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Mick_Pork said:

    "The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s comments on pensioner benefits is in this table"

    What confusion would this be?

    The comical Cameroonian spinners were adamant that there is nothing more vile, deserving of failure and opportunistic than populist posturing when little Ed attempted to form a policy on an energy price freeze. It was also grossly irresponsible because as we all know "there is no money left." Meanwhile the PB Romneys will lose no time at all telling you that it is evil socialism or indeed communism to pander to certain groups of voters, as long as it's the ones they appear to loathe in the public sector. They would also warn you of the inherent wickedness of throwing yet more money at welfare, but pensions aren't welfare, well... just because.

    *chortle*

    It's a pledge and like all Cast Iron Pledges just making it hardly means everyone is going to believe it.


    It's also a pledge based on monitoring economic benchmarks and percentages which will have little to no real salience for anyone not obsessed with politics or economics. You either feel better off or you don't and no amount of statistics will truly persuade those who don't. Idiot spinners spouting statistics in an effort to tell the voter "they've never had it so good" are far more likely to anger voters if they feel the opposite.

    And as anotherDave already pointed out,

    OAPs reliant on the state pension are a group UKIP does better than the Conservaties with.

    "LORD ASHCROFT POLL

    RETIRED VOTER ON STATE PENSION

    #UKIP 32.93%
    #LABOUR 32.32%
    #CONSERVATIVES 29%
    #LIBDEMS 5.75%"

    twitter.com/UKELECTIONS2015/statuses/419820398335635456
    So if it's a pledge every party can very easily make then it's usefulness as a political campaigning tool is at an end. Unless there is a massive built in advantage for one party to make it rather than another. Which, as we can see, there is not.



    Despite all the unnecessary invective, there isn't much to disagree with here...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840
    30% for Lib Dems amongst 18-24...

    Can't see that again.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Full steam ahead with the EU posturing.
    Guardian news ‏@guardiannews 18h

    Cameron to push for cap on European migrants in UK negotiations with EU http://gu.com/p/3yttx/tf
    Can another amusing flounce be far behind? Let's hope so. :)
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,191
    I find the focus on cosseting the current generation of pensioners depressing. Looking after yesterday at the expense of tomorrow. The contrast between how the current generation of 60-80ers and 10-30ers have benefited/will benefit from the state looking after them is utterly stark. In recent years at least, a depressing tale of one generation running things in their own interests.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    @JohnLoony wrote :

    "Tony Robinson is shorter than me in the same way that Tom Daley is taller than me."

    Have you had your gaydar fully reset after calling me out, some time back, for suggesting young Daley might be batting for the other side ?!?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    New 2015 ARSE General Election Projection Countdown :

    1 Day 30 minutes
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    On the substance of this, the way to deliver it is with a combination of money-printing and lots of low-wage immigration. That way you can still inflate away the debt (and the old dears' savings, but shhh) but bringing in more low-wage workers keeps average wages and price inflation down. This may not be compatible with reducing EU immigration, but we all know he's not really going to do that, and he gets to blame it on foreigners.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,704
    Mick_Pork said:

    fitalass said:

    Daily Telegraph - 30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends
    " Less than a third of Scots want to leave the United Kingdom, according to an opinion poll published today as the phoney war over independence ends and the battle to win this year’s referendum starts in earnest.

    Better Together, the pro-UK campaign, published a survey showing support for separation has stagnated at 30 per cent despite Alex Salmond recently unveiling his long-awaited blueprint for separation.

    Support for remaining in the UK is more than twice as high (61 per cent), according to the You Gov poll, and more than third of Scots who voted SNP in the 2011 Holyrood election are opposed to independence."

    *tears of laughter etc.*

    You didn't understand the poll then?

    Here's someone who did.
    Anti-independence campaign shoot themselves in the foot by publishing YouGov poll that shows Scots are overwhelmingly opposed to the constitutional status quo

    Incomprehensibly, 'Better Together' - the campaign that is fighting to maintain the constitutional status quo - has just published a YouGov poll revealing that the status quo is the least popular of three constitutional options...

    More powers for the Scottish Parliament - 32%
    Full independence - 30%
    Status quo - 29%

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/
    fitalass said:

    This could be a bit of a political ticking time bomb for the SNP in the run up to the next Holyrood elections.

    As big a political ticking time bomb as your curiously oft delayed scottish tory surge? :)



    Strange... I can't see the 'more powers' option on the referendum question..
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Mick_Pork said:

    fitalass said:

    Daily Telegraph - 30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends
    " Less than a third of Scots want to leave the United Kingdom, according to an opinion poll published today as the phoney war over independence ends and the battle to win this year’s referendum starts in earnest.

    Better Together, the pro-UK campaign, published a survey showing support for separation has stagnated at 30 per cent despite Alex Salmond recently unveiling his long-awaited blueprint for separation.

    Support for remaining in the UK is more than twice as high (61 per cent), according to the You Gov poll, and more than third of Scots who voted SNP in the 2011 Holyrood election are opposed to independence."

    *tears of laughter etc.*

    You didn't understand the poll then?

    Here's someone who did.
    Anti-independence campaign shoot themselves in the foot by publishing YouGov poll that shows Scots are overwhelmingly opposed to the constitutional status quo

    Incomprehensibly, 'Better Together' - the campaign that is fighting to maintain the constitutional status quo - has just published a YouGov poll revealing that the status quo is the least popular of three constitutional options...

    More powers for the Scottish Parliament - 32%
    Full independence - 30%
    Status quo - 29%

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/
    fitalass said:

    This could be a bit of a political ticking time bomb for the SNP in the run up to the next Holyrood elections.

    As big a political ticking time bomb as your curiously oft delayed scottish tory surge? :)



    Referendums are not a choice between 'the status quo' and 'not the status quo', they're a choice between 'the change on offer' and 'not the change on offer'.

    The change on offer in this case is independence, which very clearly has minority support. After all, those who want more powers for the Scottish parliament but not independence can only get to that position by voting No (unless they believe that Yes is going to lose by some distance and want to add a bit of pressure for their position). Either way, it's a good poll for Better Together.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,721
    Mick_Pork said:

    fitalass said:

    Daily Telegraph - 30pc back Scottish independence as referendum phoney war ends
    " Less than a third of Scots want to leave the United Kingdom, according to an opinion poll published today as the phoney war over independence ends and the battle to win this year’s referendum starts in earnest.

    Better Together, the pro-UK campaign, published a survey showing support for separation has stagnated at 30 per cent despite Alex Salmond recently unveiling his long-awaited blueprint for separation.

    Support for remaining in the UK is more than twice as high (61 per cent), according to the You Gov poll, and more than third of Scots who voted SNP in the 2011 Holyrood election are opposed to independence."

    *tears of laughter etc.*

    You didn't understand the poll then?

    Here's someone who did.
    Anti-independence campaign shoot themselves in the foot by publishing YouGov poll that shows Scots are overwhelmingly opposed to the constitutional status quo

    Incomprehensibly, 'Better Together' - the campaign that is fighting to maintain the constitutional status quo - has just published a YouGov poll revealing that the status quo is the least popular of three constitutional options...

    More powers for the Scottish Parliament - 32%
    Full independence - 30%
    Status quo - 29%

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/
    fitalass said:

    This could be a bit of a political ticking time bomb for the SNP in the run up to the next Holyrood elections.

    As big a political ticking time bomb as your curiously oft delayed scottish tory surge? :)



    At least you used an unbiased sorce
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    JackW said:

    New 2015 ARSE General Election Projection Countdown :

    1 Day 30 minutes

    Are you going to tell us then what's going to happen to the 2010 LD switchers which I asked you about over the weekend?

    Rod Crosby says they'll move back. Do you agree?

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Richard Wilson ‏@dontgetfooled 10h

    Woot! #Gove's deranged Spads vs Nick Clegg... (breaks out the popcorn) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10551916/Nick-Clegg-is-called-a-liar-after-he-tells-Michael-Gove-he-is-out-of-control.html


    James Patrick ‏@J_amesp 3h

    For the love of Pete, are you the Cabinet or a bunch of spoilt school children? Grow up. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/10551916/Nick-Clegg-is-called-a-liar-after-he-tells-Michael-Gove-he-is-out-of-control.html


    libdemvoice ‏@libdemvoice 16h

    Telegraph: Clegg and Cameron have to intervene in "daily" Coalition rows http://ldv.org.uk/37721 by @caronmlindsay
    Yet more tedious differentiation posturing ahead of the EU elections? Partly, but the fact is the longer the coalition goes on the more desperate both sides will get and as we saw with the Lords Reform/Boundary Changes fiasco it won't take much for it to get out of control.

    Meanwhile someone with a close eye on the lib dem finances appears to have it in for Clegg.
    Wake Up UK ‏@Shellspeare 1h

    'Cash for Clegg' controversy after Deputy PM visits firm FOUR DAYS after accepting £30,000 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nick-clegg-criticised-after-visiting-2993166 … pic.twitter.com/H8pevhjLzu
    First one of these type of 'cash for' stories for a while. Certainly won't be the last though.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    JackW said:

    @JohnLoony wrote :

    "Tony Robinson is shorter than me in the same way that Tom Daley is taller than me."

    Have you had your gaydar fully reset after calling me out, some time back, for suggesting young Daley might be batting for the other side ?!?

    I have long since given up trying to mend my gaydar. It's been broken and useless for many years.

    I don't remember you suggesting such a thing, but if you did, fair play for your wisdom. I was very surprised when Tom came out as bisexual (albeit that he didn't use that word) and I had always thought he was heterosexual due to the fact that he used to go on and on all the time about fancying Cheryl Cole and Pippa Middleton and Little Mix (a girl group on X-Factor). Anyway.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    I find the focus on cosseting the current generation of pensioners depressing. Looking after yesterday at the expense of tomorrow. The contrast between how the current generation of 60-80ers and 10-30ers have benefited/will benefit from the state looking after them is utterly stark. In recent years at least, a depressing tale of one generation running things in their own interests.

    TBF by the Brown-Osborne policy of printing money to inflate away pensioners' savings you still get to make them pay their rightful share of the national debt. With economic policy there's usually a way to jigger things around and get the outcome you want while still respecting the letter of your election promises.

    I suppose the depressing aspect of this is that the voters believe in these promises in the first place and make the politicians go through the whole charade, but the electorate is what it is.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Strange... I can't see the 'more powers' option on the referendum question..

    That would be precisely because every one of the unionist parties vehemently opposed having it on the ballot. You can't seriously think that particular fact isn't going to be hammered home every time the unionists try to backtrack on it now? Or do you?
  • RandomRandom Posts: 107
    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Gaius said:

    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    'More importantly for PB Farage makes clear in his second short piece that he will not decide where he intends to stand at the GE until after the Euro elections in May.'

    Who can blame him, he can't afford another Buckingham shambles..

    I don't khow why you think Buckingham was a shambles.

    Look at it from Faranges pont of view, he has to keep standing somewhere which he doesn't expect to win simply to get the profile of his party up until they start to gain traction. Buckingham was pretty ideal in that lab/libdems were not standing.

    Now that UKIP have traction he has already (I assume) started to look at where he can stand and win.

    In Buckingham, Farage did not only get (roundly) beaten by the speaker, he also got beaten by John Stevens, the former leader of the pro-European Conservative Party.

    You are rewriting history because it suits your narrative.
    On the subject of rewriting history, but why is it that whenever the Buckingham campaign is talked about as an example of how useless Farage is, the fact that Stevens used to be leader of the Pro-Euro Conservative Party is always mentioned, but the fact that he was a LibDem from 2000 (when the PECP was wound up and merged with the LibDems) until 2010, when he resigned to fight the election, never is? Nor for that matter is the fact that Stevens got a very similar share of the votes as the LibDems did in 2005, which at least leads to the suspicion that a large number of his votes were LibDems on holiday, especially as he had no previous track record in the constituency.

    I'm not saying that Stevens campaign was nothing more than a Libdem false flag operation (had anybody heard of the "Buckinghamshire Campaign for Democracy" prior to 2010, or indeed since?), but to describe him as an independent is at best ingenuous, surely?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Referendums are not a choice between 'the status quo' and 'not the status quo', they're a choice between 'the change on offer' and 'not the change on offer'.

    Ah yes, the bizarre and somewhat arrogant belief by the No side that only they get to decide what the referendum is about and the terms of debate. Good luck with that.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Random said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    Gaius said:

    john_zims said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    'More importantly for PB Farage makes clear in his second short piece that he will not decide where he intends to stand at the GE until after the Euro elections in May.'

    Who can blame him, he can't afford another Buckingham shambles..

    I don't khow why you think Buckingham was a shambles.

    Look at it from Faranges pont of view, he has to keep standing somewhere which he doesn't expect to win simply to get the profile of his party up until they start to gain traction. Buckingham was pretty ideal in that lab/libdems were not standing.

    Now that UKIP have traction he has already (I assume) started to look at where he can stand and win.

    In Buckingham, Farage did not only get (roundly) beaten by the speaker, he also got beaten by John Stevens, the former leader of the pro-European Conservative Party.

    You are rewriting history because it suits your narrative.
    On the subject of rewriting history, but why is it that whenever the Buckingham campaign is talked about as an example of how useless Farage is, the fact that Stevens used to be leader of the Pro-Euro Conservative Party is always mentioned, but the fact that he was a LibDem from 2000 (when the PECP was wound up and merged with the LibDems) until 2010, when he resigned to fight the election, never is? Nor for that matter is the fact that Stevens got a very similar share of the votes as the LibDems did in 2005, which at least leads to the suspicion that a large number of his votes were LibDems on holiday, especially as he had no previous track record in the constituency.

    I'm not saying that Stevens campaign was nothing more than a Libdem false flag operation (had anybody heard of the "Buckinghamshire Campaign for Democracy" prior to 2010, or indeed since?), but to describe him as an independent is at best ingenuous, surely?
    I think you are right, in that he was definitely a LDID (LibDem in disguise...) - in fact, I think (although I could be wrong) that his campaign was run by a former Lib Dem campaign manager.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    DavidL said:

    On topic, I am not sure what the confusion is supposed to be. Cameron has committed to the continuation of the triple lock on pensions. Labour's spokeman was on the radio yesterday stating that although he could not make the commitment this was their "direction of travel". It seems likely that all 3 parties will be committed to the triple lock by the election.

    Pensioners, particularly that blessed generation who got final salary scheme pensions, include many of the better off in our society but also include many that are poor. The current set up, like all universal benefits (a point acknowledged by this government in relation to CB), is extremely expensive and inefficient in providing benefits to the poor that need them and spends absurd amounts of money on those that don't.

    But it is simplistic to point to the cynical calculation highlighted by OGH. The real problem is that pensioners genuinely believe that they bought their right to a state pension by paying NI over their working lives. That lie, by politicians of all parties who spent the NI and made no provision for pensions, has come home to roost. It is very difficult for the current generation of politicians who are holding the parcel when it stops ticking to do much about that.

    I think that's a fair comment, but I read the interview as cover for a withdrawal of the pledge to protect bus passes etc. for the elderly, at least without a means test - I see the Sun has drawn the same conclusion. I was canvassing some pensioners yesterday - too few to be more than an anecdote - and they were all cynical about the triple lock ("doesn't reflect the real cost of living for older people", "politiicans will say anything") but also relaxed about limiting the heating allowance to people with incomes under £50K, which I've seen speculation about. How much that would save after administrative costs I'm not sure - does anyone here know?

    On the Scottish poll, both Better Together and Mick are making the classic polling misleader (not a word but should be) of classing a middle option as being essentially on their side. I'm sure they both know it, too.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Mick_Pork said:

    Strange... I can't see the 'more powers' option on the referendum question..

    That would be precisely because every one of the unionist parties vehemently opposed having it on the ballot. You can't seriously think that particular fact isn't going to be hammered home every time the unionists try to backtrack on it now? Or do you?
    1. I didn't say that. Please don't misquote me. If you want to paraphrase, fine, but make it clear that that's what you're doing.

    2. Hammer it home as much as you like. If you want a referendum on more powers, say what you want and ask that question instead. This referendum's about independence - you know, the question on the ballot paper?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    A couple of interesting news items in the latest Euractiv bulletin. Latvia joined the Euro this week, after preparing for it with a ferocious austerity drive. And drastic changes to the Italian electoral system seem to be genuinely likely to happen:

    http://www.euractiv.com/general/italian-coalition-eyes-speedy-el-news-532584?utm_source=EurActiv Newsletter&utm_campaign=c544aac66b-newsletter_euractiv_alerts&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bab5f0ea4e-c544aac66b-245514803
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    On topic, worth noting that the pensionable age is increasing so while an aging population means that the 60+ sector is going to increase in size, it doesn't necessarily mean that the sector in receipt of the state pension will increase.

    As an aside, but relatedly, the big political story - and with significant betting implications - is Osborne's comments about the deficit and cuts. How I read this is:

    1. Osborne is confident that the economy is running the right way and will use that as vindication for the government's policies.

    2. The 'more cuts needed' message means a subliminal theme of 'you can't send the doctor away yet'.

    3. Labour is about to be hit with a broadside of 'black holes in their spending plans', 'country can't afford them' type stories.

    The risk, of course, is that Labour will no doubt ask the government where the cuts will come, and that's a reasonable question to which there'll have to be a credible response.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Mick_Pork said:

    Referendums are not a choice between 'the status quo' and 'not the status quo', they're a choice between 'the change on offer' and 'not the change on offer'.

    Ah yes, the bizarre and somewhat arrogant belief by the No side that only they get to decide what the referendum is about and the terms of debate. Good luck with that.

    Mick, hasn't the question been decided already? And isn't David correct that it is a simple choice between 'in' and 'out'?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    On the Scottish poll, both Better Together and Mick are making the classic polling misleader (not a word but should be) of classing a middle option as being essentially on their side. I'm sure they both know it, too.

    I know that all the unionist parties are still struggling mightily with some form of consensus and a concrete promise of more powers despite opposing having it on the ballot. I also know they are going to have a great deal of trouble being believed not just because of that but because of past blunders like Douglas-Home and 1979. Finally I know full well they aren't trying to do so because they think those who want more powers will be most strongly inclined to go into their camp automatically when it finally comes to an independence or nothing question.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Economic news:

    Blow-out manufacturing PMI numbers from Spain - 54.5 from 51.6, the best numbers since 2007, and suggests that Spain (like Ireland) is now clearly on the road to recovery.

    Services PMI numbers are out from Italy (bad), France (worse), Germany (rather good) and Ireland (astonishingly good).

    UK numbers are out at at 9:30. Can it beat Irelands 61.8 Services PMI?

    If you want to make broad characterizations, countries that slashed government spending and liberalised labour markets are doing quite well. While those who increased government spending and did not, are doing very badly (ahem, France, ahem).
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    Amused by the headline about Nick Robinson. Reminds me of the time Cameron made a speech (possibly before 2010) about immigration. Robinson claimed it meant that those who would be denied entry would be more likely to have black and brown faces (there's a biasedbbc article with the exact quote, but it's not on their new site and I can't find it). The day after the speech Trevor Philips praised Cameron's speech for seeking to deracialise the immigration debate. Robinson neither corrected himself nor apologised for a rather shocking use of language.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    rcs1000 said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Referendums are not a choice between 'the status quo' and 'not the status quo', they're a choice between 'the change on offer' and 'not the change on offer'.

    Ah yes, the bizarre and somewhat arrogant belief by the No side that only they get to decide what the referendum is about and the terms of debate. Good luck with that.

    Mick, hasn't the question been decided already? And isn't David correct that it is a simple choice between 'in' and 'out'?
    That simple choice is Vote Yes for Independence. Vote No get nothing.

    The jam-tomorrow promises from the unionists (of which there are going to be a great many more coming) would seem to indicate they are less than content to have that stark prospect put to the scottish public.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    The day after the speech Trevor Philips praised Cameron's speech for seeking to deracialise the immigration debate. Robinson neither corrected himself nor apologised for a rather shocking use of language.

    Would that be before or after Cammie called UKIP "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists"?

    :)
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    New 2015 ARSE General Election Projection Countdown :

    1 Day 30 minutes

    Are you going to tell us then what's going to happen to the 2010 LD switchers which I asked you about over the weekend?

    Rod Crosby says they'll move back. Do you agree?

    I did reply to you my dear Bedford legend but you were clearly overwhelmed by news of the latest discoveries in follicular research and accordingly missed my response.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited January 2014
    Mick_Pork said:

    "The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s comments on pensioner benefits is in this table"

    What confusion would this be?

    The comical Cameroonian spinners were adamant that there is nothing more vile, deserving of failure and opportunistic than populist posturing when little Ed attempted to form a policy on an energy price freeze. It was also grossly irresponsible because as we all know "there is no money left." Meanwhile the PB Romneys will lose no time at all telling you that it is evil socialism or indeed communism to pander to certain groups of voters, as long as it's the ones they appear to loathe in the public sector. They would also warn you of the inherent wickedness of throwing yet more money at welfare, but pensions aren't welfare, well... just because.

    *chortle* [in continuum et ad infinitum]

    Dear old Pork, you are very excited this morning.

    Have you been sourcing your ground nuts from Colorado?

    There is nothing much new or surprising in anything said by Cameron on the Basic State Pension. The OBR had already assumed that the 'triple lock' will continue in place throughout the next term and its forecasts for public finances remained unaltered by the recent announcement. This means that the OBR prediction that the Public Sector Net Borrowing and the cyclically adjusted Current account will be in balance by the end of next term remains in place and is unaltered by state pension provision.

    The Basic State Pension (BSP) is uprated in April each year in line with the ‘triple-lock’ guarantee that it will increase by the highest of average earnings growth, CPI inflation in the previous September and 2.5 per cent. As a result, we assume the BSP will be uprated by 2.7 per cent in 2014-15, in line with the outturn CPI inflation rate in September 2013. This will be the third successive year that the BSP has increased faster than average earnings, with the cumulative difference over that period 4.7 per cent. On our current forecast, uprating will be in line with the 2.5 per cent minimum in 2015-16, and by average earnings growth thereafter.

    My recommendation is that you take a morning dip in the sea waters off Scotland's west coast.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    Strange... I can't see the 'more powers' option on the referendum question..

    That would be precisely because every one of the unionist parties vehemently opposed having it on the ballot. You can't seriously think that particular fact isn't going to be hammered home every time the unionists try to backtrack on it now? Or do you?
    1. I didn't say that. Please don't misquote me. If you want to paraphrase, fine, but make it clear that that's what you're doing.

    2. Hammer it home as much as you like. If you want a referendum on more powers, say what you want and ask that question instead. This referendum's about independence - you know, the question on the ballot paper?
    Calm down. That was an error in the quote formatting and should have been attributed to Slackbladder.

    As for what's on the ballot I'm entirely content it will be down to Vote Yes get Independence Vote No get Nothing. I think you'll find it's the unionist parties that will be struggling to promise more powers despite it not being on the ballot. As some of them already have done but with an amusing and telling lack of detail.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    JohnLoony said:

    JackW said:

    @JohnLoony wrote :

    "Tony Robinson is shorter than me in the same way that Tom Daley is taller than me."

    Have you had your gaydar fully reset after calling me out, some time back, for suggesting young Daley might be batting for the other side ?!?

    I have long since given up trying to mend my gaydar. It's been broken and useless for many years.

    I don't remember you suggesting such a thing, but if you did, fair play for your wisdom. I was very surprised when Tom came out as bisexual (albeit that he didn't use that word) and I had always thought he was heterosexual due to the fact that he used to go on and on all the time about fancying Cheryl Cole and Pippa Middleton and Little Mix (a girl group on X-Factor). Anyway.
    Actually it's Mrs Jack W who is the gay witch hunter general. Many in the family believe her gaydar extends to the womb.

    She tagged Mr Daley way back and where I only saw a polite, confident and media friendly lad, she was right on the case and stamped "friend of Dorothy" on him after the Beijing Olympics. Uncanny !!

  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Strange... I can't see the 'more powers' option on the referendum question..

    That would be precisely because every one of the unionist parties vehemently opposed having it on the ballot. You can't seriously think that particular fact isn't going to be hammered home every time the unionists try to backtrack on it now? Or do you?
    1. I didn't say that. Please don't misquote me. If you want to paraphrase, fine, but make it clear that that's what you're doing.

    2. Hammer it home as much as you like. If you want a referendum on more powers, say what you want and ask that question instead. This referendum's about independence - you know, the question on the ballot paper?
    Calm down. That was an error in the quote formatting and should have been attributed to Slackbladder.

    As for what's on the ballot I'm entirely content it will be down to Vote Yes get Independence Vote No get Nothing. I think you'll find it's the unionist parties that will be struggling to promise more powers despite it not being on the ballot. As some of them already have done but with an amusing and telling lack of detail.
    OK, apologies on the first point.

    As for the 'what next' question, it is of significance but it's clearly secondary to the independence debate. I also suspect that there'll be Settlement Fatigue after the vote and that anyone who immediately moves on to 'more powers' in the event of a No vote will be face a wave of apathy from those more interested in bread and butter issues. The unionists don't need to agree a common line on what next / devomax / more powers: that's a different question and will produce different campaign coalitions as and when it comes up. The fact remains though that the only viable route to devomax is via No.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    Kim Jong Un's triple-lock promise to his uncle: If you make me leader I will not have you drowned, poisoned or strangled.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Interesting comment on engines from Niki Lauda (of Mercedes):
    http://www.espn.co.uk/mercedes/motorsport/story/140857.html

    Basically, it's advantage manufacturers. So, Mercedes and Ferrari will be greatly helped by their ability to actually fix, as well as report, problems. This can't help the likes of McLaren, Red Bull or Lotus.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    re Cam in the Indy ref.

    Has there ever been an election debate where one of the people in the debate isn't allowed to vote ?

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    edited January 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    Economic news:


    UK numbers are out at at 9:30. Can it beat Irelands 61.8 Services PMI?


    And at only 58.8 the answer is no.

    Still the good news from Markit is that 2013 growth is estimated at 1.9% and the strongest growth in the service sector was in the 'business' side of services rather than the household consumption side.

    http://www.markiteconomics.com/Survey/PressRelease.mvc/1132e9ba11934548a369f9a4872acb02

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited January 2014
    The Goodish News continues

    Markit's Services PMI has come in at 58.8 for the month of December, a shade down on the 60.0 reading in November.

    This slight dip, matching that in Manufacturing and Construction, also follows trends seen in China, the US, Germany and the Eurozone. It is too early yet to say whether this is a small dip or the beginning of a turning point towards a sustained downturn.

    Caution stated, the UK figures are excellent by comparison with its main trading competitors and the underlying metrics remain strong.

    The positive trends in activity and new business are widely expected to continue in 2014. Optimism amongst the survey panel regarding activity over the next 12 months was at its highest since March 2010, with well over 50% of respondents forecasting growth. Investment in capacity, new products and marketing platforms was also noted as a reason to be confident heading into 2014.

    There was further evidence of capacity pressures in December, with backlogs of work rising for a ninth successive month. Although not to the extent seen in recent months, backlog growth was solid as continued sharp rises in new business stretched resources.


    It looks as if antifrank will be busy in 2014.

    For comparison, here are the indices for Germany, the Eurozone and France

    Germany

    Final Germany Services Business Activity Index at 53.5 in December, down from 55.7 in November (2 month low).

    Final Germany Composite Output Index at 55.0 in December, down from 55.4 in November (2 month low).

    Eurozone

    Final Eurozone Composite Output Index: 52.1 (Flash 52.1, November 51.7)

    Final Eurozone Services Business Activity Index: 51.0 (Flash 51.0, November 51.2)

    France

    Final Markit France Composite Output Index: 47.3 (48.0 in November, 7 month low)

    Final Markit France Services Business Activity Index: 47.8 (48.0 in November, 6 month low)

    La pauvre France!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    AveryLP said:



    France

    Final Markit France Composite Output Index: 47.3 (48.0 in November, 7 month low)

    Final Markit France Services Business Activity Index: 47.8 (48.0 in November, 6 month low)

    If France were a horse you would shoot it.

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sometimes the important stuff is hidden in plain sight. The BBC's main news story at the moment is one more illustration of the Conservatives' electoral strategy:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25617844

    "In his speech later Mr Osborne is expected to warn: "As a result of the painful cuts we've made, the deficit is down by a third and we're borrowing nearly £3,000 less for every one of you and for every family in the country.

    That's the good news. The bad news is there's still a long way to go."

    He said the UK was "borrowing around £100bn a year - and paying half that money a year in interest just to service our debts".

    He added: "We've got to make more cuts. That's why 2014 is the year of hard truths - the year when Britain faces a choice.

    "Do we say 'the worst is over, back we go to our bad habits of borrowing and spending and living beyond our means and let the next generation pay the bill'?

    "Or do we say to ourselves 'yes, because of our plan, things are getting better - but there is still a long way to go and there are big, underlying problems we have to fix in our economy'?"
    "
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    AveryLP said:

    The Goodish News continues

    AveryLP, Markit of 58.8 is a very good number by any reasonable standard. You can never maintain a 60+ number for more than a month or so. Even the Chinese PMI number hasn't been above 60 vey often in the last five years.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840
    Don't want to sound like a crack addict but - Whens the Yougov ?
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited January 2014
    @antifrank - Quite so. Not that the Tories' electoral strategy has been any secret - they have been trumpeting it consistently for at least the last year, in almost every major speech and in e-mails to supporters and so on.

    The challenge for Labour is that they have already, albeit grudgingly, accepted the principle that the country will need to continue the programme of getting the public finances under proper control. David H said upthread "Labour will no doubt ask the government where the cuts will come, and that's a reasonable question to which there'll have to be a credible response." But this is a trap for Labour: once they've said they'll match spending cuts (as they have), it's hard for them to attack on the basis of where the cuts will come without exposing themselves to the same riposte, or to the even more damaging riposte that they are not serious about the public finances despite what they say.

    It's a trap they seem curiously determined to jump into, despite it being heavily sign-posted.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Another interesting comment re the economic debate here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25614095

    Essentially, what they're saying is that the rate at which interest rates rise determines how salable the debt will be. Work your own conclusions as to what that's mean for choosing to borrow and spend more / plan to make further cuts (indeed, I wonder whether Osborne's own comments have been timed to coincide with it).
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    The Goodish News continues

    AveryLP, Markit of 58.8 is a very good number by any reasonable standard. You can never maintain a 60+ number for more than a month or so. Even the Chinese PMI number hasn't been above 60 vey often in the last five years.
    Agreed. In the body of my post, I did describe them as "excellent".

    But equally there has been a small easing off in the rate of growth across the major economies which given its consistency is going to be more than statistical error. The "ish" addition was in context no more than the expression of warranted caution.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    AveryLP said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    "The reason why there’s all the confusion over Cameron’s comments on pensioner benefits is in this table"

    What confusion would this be?

    The comical Cameroonian spinners were adamant that there is nothing more vile, deserving of failure and opportunistic than populist posturing when little Ed attempted to form a policy on an energy price freeze. It was also grossly irresponsible because as we all know "there is no money left." Meanwhile the PB Romneys will lose no time at all telling you that it is evil socialism or indeed communism to pander to certain groups of voters, as long as it's the ones they appear to loathe in the public sector. They would also warn you of the inherent wickedness of throwing yet more money at welfare, but pensions aren't welfare, well... just because.

    *chortle* [in continuum et ad infinitum]

    Dear old Pork, you are very excited this morning.

    Have you been sourcing your ground nuts from Colorado?
    Dear old Seth O Logue, you are very touchy when incompetent spin is brought up.

    Are you still taking the p*ss out of Cameron and Osbrowne with your "ironic" spinning or have you reverted to your out of touch twit persona that nobody takes seriously? Either way even the fops and their inept PR machine would throw out your attempts at spinning as comically counterproductive for the tories.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136

    @antifrank - Quite so. Not that the Tories' electoral strategy has been any secret - they have been trumpeting it consistently for at least the last year, in almost every major speech and in e-mails to supporters and so on.

    The challenge for Labour is that they have already, albeit grudgingly, accepted the principle that the country will need to continue the programme of getting the public finances under proper control. David H said upthread "Labour will no doubt ask the government where the cuts will come, and that's a reasonable question to which there'll have to be a credible response." But this is a trap for Labour: once they've said they'll match spending cuts (as they have), it's hard for them to attack on the basis of where the cuts will come without exposing themselves to the same riposte, or to the even more damaging riposte that they are not serious about the public finances despite what they say.

    It's a trap they seem curiously determined to jump into, despite it being heavily sign-posted.

    It's not rocket science. They pick a couple of minor, low-cost things to reverse and identify some unlucky group to pay for the reversals via a special "unphotogenic industry levy" or something.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Waterstones ‏@Waterstones 42s

    Sad to hear of the death of acclaimed political journalist and writer, Simon Hoggart, who has died, aged 67. #RIP pic.twitter.com/oH4yy5aUYp
    Bit of a shocker that. He could skewer politicians on any side without reverting to the cheap bitchiness some of the lesser sketch writers retreat to. Genuinely laugh out loud funny at times and had a keen ear for the mood of the commons and westminster during dramatic events or the most mundane of debates. A sad loss.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    Pulpstar said:

    Don't want to sound like a crack addict but - Whens the Yougov ?

    Tomorrow morning, technically, but they seem to have got into the welcome habit of tweeting them about 10pm on the previous night. Hang in there - the trembling hands, the dilating eyes, yes, we know, but another 12 hours and you'll feel better. There may be a methadone fix in the form of that biweekly thingy during the day, too.

    Let's have a YG prediction contest. Mine: Lab 37, Con 32, UKIP 13, LD 11.



  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited January 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Referendums are not a choice between 'the status quo' and 'not the status quo', they're a choice between 'the change on offer' and 'not the change on offer'.

    Ah yes, the bizarre and somewhat arrogant belief by the No side that only they get to decide what the referendum is about and the terms of debate. Good luck with that.

    Mick, hasn't the question been decided already? And isn't David correct that it is a simple choice between 'in' and 'out'?
    Salmond clearly wanted 'In' or 'DevoMax'.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Another interesting comment re the economic debate here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25614095

    Essentially, what they're saying is that the rate at which interest rates rise determines how salable the debt will be. Work your own conclusions as to what that's mean for choosing to borrow and spend more / plan to make further cuts (indeed, I wonder whether Osborne's own comments have been timed to coincide with it).

    David

    The Debt Management Office are being assisted by the reduction in the amount of debt issued. In the Autumn Statement Osborne reduced the amount of gilts and Treasury bills to issued this financial year (i.e. before end March 2014) by £15.5 billion.

    That is a reduction in net borrowing (i.e. after deducting borrowing to roll-over redemptions) of some 15% of the annual total.

    Assuming the sale of Lloyds bank shares will continue through 2014 and the cash flows from the BoE APF scheme continue to come in under the radar, the government's net cash requirement will continue to be much lower than the headline borrowing figures printed in the press.

    All said though, UK bonds have lost more money for investors over the past year than competing issues, so there is a pricing issue.

    Much will depend on the extent to which the markets expectations of interest rate rises remain in line with the BoE's 'forward guidance'. The DMO will hit difficulties in issuance if the a significant gap in expectations arises.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,753
    The cost of living "debate" started by Miliband in his Conference speech was a bold and temporarily successful policy to get back to what Labour does best. In short ask not what you can do for your country but what your country can do for you.

    Osborne is attempting to get this back to where the tories feel comfortable, namely discussing where the further cuts are going to fall. Labour find this very difficult territory as their campaign is all about goodies for selected groups. Will Osborne succeed? The key obvious fact in his corner is a deficit of £100bn a year that needs serious sorting. No one can credibly argue this is a state with money to burn.

    But does the population as a whole want to hear more pain? I think that is harder to answer. I am just sure that it is a better conversation for the tories to have with the electorate than the one they have been having for the last 3 months.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840

    Pulpstar said:

    Don't want to sound like a crack addict but - Whens the Yougov ?

    Tomorrow morning, technically, but they seem to have got into the welcome habit of tweeting them about 10pm on the previous night. Hang in there - the trembling hands, the dilating eyes, yes, we know, but another 12 hours and you'll feel better. There may be a methadone fix in the form of that biweekly thingy during the day, too.

    Let's have a YG prediction contest. Mine: Lab 37, Con 32, UKIP 13, LD 11.



    Lab 38 Con 34 UKIP 12 LD 11
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559

    @antifrank - Quite so. Not that the Tories' electoral strategy has been any secret - they have been trumpeting it consistently for at least the last year, in almost every major speech and in e-mails to supporters and so on.

    The challenge for Labour is that they have already, albeit grudgingly, accepted the principle that the country will need to continue the programme of getting the public finances under proper control. David H said upthread "Labour will no doubt ask the government where the cuts will come, and that's a reasonable question to which there'll have to be a credible response." But this is a trap for Labour: once they've said they'll match spending cuts (as they have), it's hard for them to attack on the basis of where the cuts will come without exposing themselves to the same riposte, or to the even more damaging riposte that they are not serious about the public finances despite what they say.

    It's a trap they seem curiously determined to jump into, despite it being heavily sign-posted.

    "the even more damaging riposte that they are not serious about the public finances despite what they say."

    Richard, thanks for brightening up a cold January day with some mirth. The very idea that Labour give a toss ( to quote the SCoE ) is just risible. At the first chance to splurge some cash they'll be off spending faster than a russian oligarch in a who's got the biggest yacht competition.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Don't want to sound like a crack addict but - Whens the Yougov ?

    Tomorrow morning, technically, but they seem to have got into the welcome habit of tweeting them about 10pm on the previous night. Hang in there - the trembling hands, the dilating eyes, yes, we know, but another 12 hours and you'll feel better. There may be a methadone fix in the form of that biweekly thingy during the day, too.

    Let's have a YG prediction contest. Mine: Lab 37, Con 32, UKIP 13, LD 11.



    Lab 38 Con 34 UKIP 12 LD 11
    Lab 36 Con 37 UKIP 10 LD 10

    Compouter1 on life support :-)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Don't want to sound like a crack addict but - Whens the Yougov ?

    Tomorrow morning, technically, but they seem to have got into the welcome habit of tweeting them about 10pm on the previous night. Hang in there - the trembling hands, the dilating eyes, yes, we know, but another 12 hours and you'll feel better. There may be a methadone fix in the form of that biweekly thingy during the day, too.

    Let's have a YG prediction contest. Mine: Lab 37, Con 32, UKIP 13, LD 11.



    Lab 38 Con 34 UKIP 12 LD 11
    Lab 36 Con 37 UKIP 10 LD 10

    Compouter1 on life support :-)
    Maybe the poll on Jan 7th 2015 :)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
    Well, Ireland's GDP grew by 1% in 2Q13 (quarter-over-quarter, and revised up sharply), and 1.5% in 3Q13. Those are staggeringly good numbers. Essentially, Ireland's economy shows how sharply you can bounce back if: (a) you've made structural adjustments to your economy; (b) you've cut government spending; and (c) you've sorted out your banks.

    We were fortunate not to need labour market reform; we've structurally cut government spending; and we've sorted out our banks. (We did the last well before the Spanish or the Irish.)

    Essentially, the US has led, and the UK followed 18 months behind. Ireland is six months behind the UK, and Spain is a further six months back. I am hearing somewhat encouraging things about Italy, with the banks hopefully being sorted out in the near future, although labour market reform there remains elusive.

    France, however, remains the sick man of Europe. As I have said many times previously, the decisions of M. Hollande will - much more than the gyrations of Mr Farage - will decide whether the EU and the Euro survive.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Nobody should be remotely surprised the tories are going to try and go 24/7 on "don't let Labour ruin it again" come the election. We basically knew that from the day after the 2010 election. Whether the public will be convinced another five years of Osbrowne is the answer remains to be seen. However, the tories certainly won't be doing much convincing with economic statistics. The public has a habit of deciding for themselves whether they are better off and who they trust the most/least on such matters.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
    Well, Ireland's GDP grew by 1% in 2Q13 (quarter-over-quarter, and revised up sharply), and 1.5% in 3Q13. Those are staggeringly good numbers. Essentially, Ireland's economy shows how sharply you can bounce back if: (a) you've made structural adjustments to your economy; (b) you've cut government spending; and (c) you've sorted out your banks.

    We were fortunate not to need labour market reform; we've structurally cut government spending; and we've sorted out our banks. (We did the last well before the Spanish or the Irish.)

    Essentially, the US has led, and the UK followed 18 months behind. Ireland is six months behind the UK, and Spain is a further six months back. I am hearing somewhat encouraging things about Italy, with the banks hopefully being sorted out in the near future, although labour market reform there remains elusive.

    France, however, remains the sick man of Europe. As I have said many times previously, the decisions of M. Hollande will - much more than the gyrations of Mr Farage - will decide whether the EU and the Euro survive.
    While that's all good news begorrah, try asking an Irish person if they feel well off. Ireland has moved off critical life support but still has several years of slow rehabilitation ahead.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    The Goodish News continues

    AveryLP, Markit of 58.8 is a very good number by any reasonable standard. You can never maintain a 60+ number for more than a month or so. Even the Chinese PMI number hasn't been above 60 vey often in the last five years.
    Agreed. In the body of my post, I did describe them as "excellent".

    But equally there has been a small easing off in the rate of growth across the major economies which given its consistency is going to be more than statistical error. The "ish" addition was in context no more than the expression of warranted caution.

    I think you are being unduly pessimistic. China's PMI numbers have been very weak (registering only just over 50, and massively diverging from stated 7+% GDP numbers). But in the US and in the European economies (excuding France) the number have been reasonable to good.

    Last week, the US manufacturing PMI came in at 57 - above forecasts, and a very strong number.

    In Europe, confidence numbers are generally rising. The pan-Euro Sentix economic confidence number out today came in at +11.9, well above the +9.5 expected, and the +8.0 achieved a month ago. Italy's manufacturing PMI that was out last week showed that country dramatically improving, going from 51.4 to 53.3. Germany edged up from 54.2 to 54.3. Of the major countries, only France is going backwards.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited January 2014


    Richard, thanks for brightening up a cold January day with some mirth. The very idea that Labour give a toss ( to quote the SCoE ) is just risible.

    True enough, but they seem to have trapped themselves into a position where they'll be saying they do, but won't be able to answer the most basic questions about how - or at least, not without alienating the support base.

    You can see the dilemma they've made for themselves here, in an announcement which Labour did their level best to bury by releasing on the 19th December (!):

    http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=4694
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    AveryLP said:

    Another interesting comment re the economic debate here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25614095

    Essentially, what they're saying is that the rate at which interest rates rise determines how salable the debt will be. Work your own conclusions as to what that's mean for choosing to borrow and spend more / plan to make further cuts (indeed, I wonder whether Osborne's own comments have been timed to coincide with it).

    David

    The Debt Management Office are being assisted by the reduction in the amount of debt issued. In the Autumn Statement Osborne reduced the amount of gilts and Treasury bills to issued this financial year (i.e. before end March 2014) by £15.5 billion.

    That is a reduction in net borrowing (i.e. after deducting borrowing to roll-over redemptions) of some 15% of the annual total.

    Assuming the sale of Lloyds bank shares will continue through 2014 and the cash flows from the BoE APF scheme continue to come in under the radar, the government's net cash requirement will continue to be much lower than the headline borrowing figures printed in the press.

    All said though, UK bonds have lost more money for investors over the past year than competing issues, so there is a pricing issue.

    Much will depend on the extent to which the markets expectations of interest rate rises remain in line with the BoE's 'forward guidance'. The DMO will hit difficulties in issuance if the a significant gap in expectations arises.

    Avery - Indeed. What strikes me as a coincidence is that the DMO have said this on the same day that Osborne has gone on the record about the need to make further cuts. Whether co-ordinated or not, the DMO's comments certainly chime with to Osborne's tune that the country can't afford to deviate from the cuts / rebalancing agenda.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
    Well, Ireland's GDP grew by 1% in 2Q13 (quarter-over-quarter, and revised up sharply), and 1.5% in 3Q13. Those are staggeringly good numbers. Essentially, Ireland's economy shows how sharply you can bounce back if: (a) you've made structural adjustments to your economy; (b) you've cut government spending; and (c) you've sorted out your banks.

    We were fortunate not to need labour market reform; we've structurally cut government spending; and we've sorted out our banks. (We did the last well before the Spanish or the Irish.)

    Essentially, the US has led, and the UK followed 18 months behind. Ireland is six months behind the UK, and Spain is a further six months back. I am hearing somewhat encouraging things about Italy, with the banks hopefully being sorted out in the near future, although labour market reform there remains elusive.

    France, however, remains the sick man of Europe. As I have said many times previously, the decisions of M. Hollande will - much more than the gyrations of Mr Farage - will decide whether the EU and the Euro survive.
    Looking only at growth numbers is horribly misleading. Ireland remains below peak level of GDP, as does Spain. Not really a recovery at all.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766

    While that's all good news begorrah, try asking an Irish person if they feel well off. Ireland has moved off critical life support but still has several years of slow rehabilitation ahead.

    The question is not are things great? but are they improving?. Ireland and Spain both had crazy building dominated debt bubbles that put the UK to shame. Both of them have taken some very painful medicine, and both are beginning to improve. Irish unemployment has fallen from a peak of 15.1% to 12.5%, with the most rapid improvement happening in the last three months (with almost a 1% reduction).

    Ireland now runs a trade surplus, has sorted out its banks, and is showing annualised GDP growth of close 4% a year. I suspect unemployment will be below 10% by the the end of this year, and government debt-to-GDP should start falling this year. That's a pretty impressive achievement for a country which, a few years ago, was unable to pay its bills and which had to go running to the ECB and the IMF.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840

    AveryLP said:

    Another interesting comment re the economic debate here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25614095

    Essentially, what they're saying is that the rate at which interest rates rise determines how salable the debt will be. Work your own conclusions as to what that's mean for choosing to borrow and spend more / plan to make further cuts (indeed, I wonder whether Osborne's own comments have been timed to coincide with it).

    David

    The Debt Management Office are being assisted by the reduction in the amount of debt issued. In the Autumn Statement Osborne reduced the amount of gilts and Treasury bills to issued this financial year (i.e. before end March 2014) by £15.5 billion.

    That is a reduction in net borrowing (i.e. after deducting borrowing to roll-over redemptions) of some 15% of the annual total.

    Assuming the sale of Lloyds bank shares will continue through 2014 and the cash flows from the BoE APF scheme continue to come in under the radar, the government's net cash requirement will continue to be much lower than the headline borrowing figures printed in the press.

    All said though, UK bonds have lost more money for investors over the past year than competing issues, so there is a pricing issue.

    Much will depend on the extent to which the markets expectations of interest rate rises remain in line with the BoE's 'forward guidance'. The DMO will hit difficulties in issuance if the a significant gap in expectations arises.

    Avery - Indeed. What strikes me as a coincidence is that the DMO have said this on the same day that Osborne has gone on the record about the need to make further cuts. Whether co-ordinated or not, the DMO's comments certainly chime with to Osborne's tune that the country can't afford to deviate from the cuts / rebalancing agenda.
    Except for the oldies.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840


    Richard, thanks for brightening up a cold January day with some mirth. The very idea that Labour give a toss ( to quote the SCoE ) is just risible.

    True enough, but they seem to have trapped themselves into a position where they'll be saying they do, but won't be able to answer the most basic questions about how - or at least, not without alienating the support base.

    You can see the dilemma they've made for themselves here, in an announcement which Labour did their level best to bury by releasing on the 19th December (!):

    http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=4694
    A Zero spending review would be an excellent 'thing'. But I doubt Labour will go near that in a million years.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
    Well, Ireland's GDP grew by 1% in 2Q13 (quarter-over-quarter, and revised up sharply), and 1.5% in 3Q13. Those are staggeringly good numbers. Essentially, Ireland's economy shows how sharply you can bounce back if: (a) you've made structural adjustments to your economy; (b) you've cut government spending; and (c) you've sorted out your banks.

    We were fortunate not to need labour market reform; we've structurally cut government spending; and we've sorted out our banks. (We did the last well before the Spanish or the Irish.)

    Essentially, the US has led, and the UK followed 18 months behind. Ireland is six months behind the UK, and Spain is a further six months back. I am hearing somewhat encouraging things about Italy, with the banks hopefully being sorted out in the near future, although labour market reform there remains elusive.

    France, however, remains the sick man of Europe. As I have said many times previously, the decisions of M. Hollande will - much more than the gyrations of Mr Farage - will decide whether the EU and the Euro survive.
    Looking only at growth numbers is horribly misleading. Ireland remains below peak level of GDP, as does Spain. Not really a recovery at all.
    Well, then that's true of the UK too. In 2008 UK GDP was $2.8trillion and in 2013 it was $2.44trillion.

    Are we not having a recovery?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559


    Richard, thanks for brightening up a cold January day with some mirth. The very idea that Labour give a toss ( to quote the SCoE ) is just risible.

    True enough, but they seem to have trapped themselves into a position where they'll be saying they do, but won't be able to answer the most basic questions about how.

    You can see the dilemma they've made for themselves here, in an announcement which Labour did their level best to bury by releasing on the 19th December (!):

    http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=4694
    Yes, and they trapped themselves in to that over a year ago by signing up to the coalition plans and refusing to venture an alternative economic policy ( since they haven't got one ). Meantime they've gone off on cost of living just as the economy has bounced back and companies will start to pay more to keep staff and as HMG has more money in its pocket and can afford to put cash back in voters' pockets.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    AveryLP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    UK Services PMI is out: 58.8. That's a very good number, one of the best in UK one's on record, and it indicates the economy is growing very rapidly. But it is slightly worse than Ireland, which notched up a frankly staggering 61.8. The UK number would translate to an economy growing at an annualised rate of 3.5-4.0% in Q4, while the Irish number suggests growth of slightly over 4%.

    That's a blindsider, Robert.

    I left space for you to post on tapas output in Spain! Wasn't expecting to be pipped by the leprechauns.
    Well, Ireland's GDP grew by 1% in 2Q13 (quarter-over-quarter, and revised up sharply), and 1.5% in 3Q13. Those are staggeringly good numbers. Essentially, Ireland's economy shows how sharply you can bounce back if: (a) you've made structural adjustments to your economy; (b) you've cut government spending; and (c) you've sorted out your banks.

    We were fortunate not to need labour market reform; we've structurally cut government spending; and we've sorted out our banks. (We did the last well before the Spanish or the Irish.)

    Essentially, the US has led, and the UK followed 18 months behind. Ireland is six months behind the UK, and Spain is a further six months back. I am hearing somewhat encouraging things about Italy, with the banks hopefully being sorted out in the near future, although labour market reform there remains elusive.

    France, however, remains the sick man of Europe. As I have said many times previously, the decisions of M. Hollande will - much more than the gyrations of Mr Farage - will decide whether the EU and the Euro survive.
    Looking only at growth numbers is horribly misleading. Ireland remains below peak level of GDP, as does Spain. Not really a recovery at all.
    Well, then that's true of the UK too. In 2008 UK GDP was $2.8trillion and in 2013 it was $2.44trillion.

    Are we not having a recovery?
    We're having a recovery but we haven't fully recovered.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262


    Richard, thanks for brightening up a cold January day with some mirth. The very idea that Labour give a toss ( to quote the SCoE ) is just risible.

    True enough, but they seem to have trapped themselves into a position where they'll be saying they do, but won't be able to answer the most basic questions about how - or at least, not without alienating the support base.

    You can see the dilemma they've made for themselves here, in an announcement which Labour did their level best to bury by releasing on the 19th December (!):

    http://www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=4694
    Indeed. Buried deep within the article one finds -

    'As we have said before, the last Labour government did not spend every pound of public money well.'

    (Though I'm not sure that I can remember them saying anything like that previously)
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited January 2014
    Pulpstar said:


    A Zero spending review would be an excellent 'thing'. But I doubt Labour will go near that in a million years.

    Well, they claim to be doing so. Quite how they will reconcile such an approach with their opposition to almost every single cut, let alone tell their supporters that they've decided to cut out a whole raft of spending which Osborne wasn't targeting, remains to be seen.

    I really don't understand why they've gone down this route. Just as the Tories can't out-snake Milband in his cost-of-living snake oil, Labour can never win in a match of who is best placed to control public spending.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Interesting that the Labour vote was between 28% and 31% for all age groups. The big difference in voting patterns was the LDs being more popular with younger age groups at the expense of the Tories.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Welcome back, Mr. Socrates.

    Mr. Nabavi, one suspects Labour's opposition to a £26,000 per year cap on benefits will get raised by both Coalition parties. It was bonkers at the time and remains bonkers now.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766


    We're having a recovery but we haven't fully recovered.

    Yes, my point is that:

    The US was the first country to sort out its banks (and did not have a problem of excessive government spending or inflexible labour laws), it was the first to begin recovering, and its GDP is back at peak levels.

    The UK was the second country to sort out its banks. It did have to make structural changes to government spending, but it already had a flexible labour market. It's GDP has been recovering for 18 months or so, but is still more than 5% below peak.

    Ireland was next to adapt. It instituted very aggressive cuts to government spending, sorted out its banking sector, did a huge amount of private sector deleveraging, and further loosened labour laws. It is now growing very rapidly, albeit its GDP is more than 5% below peak, and unemployment remains relatively high (although now falling fast).

    Spain has also done the right things. It sorted out its banks only in 2012 (three years after the UK, and two after Ireland). It dramatically cut government spending, and liberalised its labour markets. It has also reduced private sector debt levels considerably. It is now beginning to recover although its GDP is more than 10% below peak levels. Unemployment, although now falling, remains incredibly high (although it's worth noting that these are not unprecedented levels for Spain - they had similar (25%) levels of unemployment in 1994.

  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited January 2014
    ''Irish unemployment has fallen from a peak of 15.1% to 12.5%, with the most rapid improvement happening in the last three months (with almost a 1% reduction). ''

    Many left-orientated posters were arguing on here 18 months ago that Ireland's revival was effectively impossible because of its austerity policy.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,840
    edited January 2014
    AndyJS said:

    Interesting that the Labour vote was between 28% and 31% for all age groups. The big difference in voting patterns was the LDs being more popular with younger age groups at the expense of the Tories.

    I think there will be swing from Lib Dem -> Labour amongst 18-34s. You might say they don't vote, but the turnout %s are 'baked in' to the overall.

    Meanwhile UKIP will chip away at the 60+ CON vote (And Labour/NOTA), but net effect CON...
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited January 2014
    @rcs1000

    I think you are being unduly pessimistic. China's PMI numbers have been very weak (registering only just over 50, and massively diverging from stated 7+% GDP numbers). But in the US and in the European economies (excuding France) the number have been reasonable to good.

    Last week, the US manufacturing PMI came in at 57 - above forecasts, and a very strong number.

    In Europe, confidence numbers are generally rising. The pan-Euro Sentix economic confidence number out today came in at +11.9, well above the +9.5 expected, and the +8.0 achieved a month ago. Italy's manufacturing PMI that was out last week showed that country dramatically improving, going from 51.4 to 53.3. Germany edged up from 54.2 to 54.3. Of the major countries, only France is going backwards.


    I am not a natural pessimist, Robert! And on the issue of confidence metrics and PMIs, it is unwise to rely on small fluctuations as being indicators of outcomes.

    But for all the growing confidence and step improvements in growth, global trade value and volume remains depressed. China (correctly) are responding to the reduction in consumption in its main trading partners forced by austerity by refocussing their own economy on domestic growth. In the long term this will benefit the global economy but the short term effect is to reduce growth and, indirectly, trade.

    The growth in the Eurozone is to be welcomed but it has not been sufficient to boost the UK's exports to the area. At present, UK growth is multi-sectoral but heavily skewed towards personal and household consumption. This is only sustainable over the short to medium term: our mantelpiece piggy banks are being emptied and there remains a reluctance to borrow. So global trade needs to grow in line or more strongly than domestic output if the growth rates experienced in the last three quarters are to be sustained over the recovery cycle.

    This isn't really pessimism. The UK, European and Global economies are in a better position than they were a year ago, but all problems haven't been solved and there remains much work to be done. Trade, productivity, investment and real earnings growth are all poor and need urgent attention. And the burden of spending cuts to meet the OBR's Fiscal Forecasts remain mostly in front of us rather than behind.

    A different set of problems to 2010 maybe but I remain cautiously confident that they are more likely than not to be solved.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    What I find confusing about the state pension announcement is that there hasnt been an immediate, obvious response to the "what are you doing about universal benefits?" question which means any reassurance from the triple lock announcement goes out the window immediately as pensioners start to worry about bus passes / WFA / tv licences etc.

    Ok, even more confusing is why Cameron should be trumpeting a pension indexation policy that delivered LOWER state pensions over this parliament than the old, pre-triple lock policy would have delivered.
  • Neil said:

    Ok, even more confusing is why Cameron should be trumpeting a pension indexation policy that delivered LOWER state pensions over this parliament than the old, pre-triple lock policy would have delivered.

    Because he's smart?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,559
    edited January 2014
    rcs1000 said:


    We're having a recovery but we haven't fully recovered.

    Yes, my point is that:

    The US was the first country to sort out its banks (and did not have a problem of excessive government spending or inflexible labour laws), it was the first to begin recovering, and its GDP is back at peak levels.

    The UK was the second country to sort out its banks. It did have to make structural changes to government spending, but it already had a flexible labour market. It's GDP has been recovering for 18 months or so, but is still more than 5% below peak.

    Ireland was next to adapt. It instituted very aggressive cuts to government spending, sorted out its banking sector, did a huge amount of private sector deleveraging, and further loosened labour laws. It is now growing very rapidly, albeit its GDP is more than 5% below peak, and unemployment remains relatively high (although now falling fast).

    Spain has also done the right things. It sorted out its banks only in 2012 (three years after the UK, and two after Ireland). It dramatically cut government spending, and liberalised its labour markets. It has also reduced private sector debt levels considerably. It is now beginning to recover although its GDP is more than 10% below peak levels. Unemployment, although now falling, remains incredibly high (although it's worth noting that these are not unprecedented levels for Spain - they had similar (25%) levels of unemployment in 1994.

    Since when has the UK sorted out its banks ?

    This is one of GO's biggest failings. We have a sick oligopoly on continued taxpayer life support which is failing to lend to the business sector.

    When he has broken up a mega bank, restored competition, got interest rates back to normal levels and restored commercial lending he can think about making the claim. In between he's simply fiddling the books in the hope that our bank failures can do a Lazarus.
This discussion has been closed.