politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s Oldies’ headache: Turnout levels reverting to GE2015
Options
Comments
-
Whilst i agree to some extent - especially where education is concerned, NHS is a bit more problematic because of the extent to which there is a permanent stuggle to match public demand and expectation, the irony is that the problems in Local Government have not been solely caused by Central Government cuts, but by the "one size fits all" approach to restricting the ability of authorities to compensate by raising Council tax. The cuts were an opportunity to re-invigorate local democracy to some extent, by allowing local politicians to make genuine choices between raising taxes, making cuts, or finding 'painless' efficiencies, but this has been denied them. The irony being that previously relatively efficient authorities were actually penalised more because they had already made the efficiencies that others were now forced into, and had lower ability to raise taxes because of their inevitably lower tax basis.notme said:
Local gvt should be a case study of how you can take 40% out of a public service and it not make the slightest jot of difference to the service delivered. The struggle is led by increased social services demand and is only now hitting home. Local gvt has now reached a point where it needs to grow adult care greater than inflation.
We need to be rolling these kind of cuts across the board. Nhs and education behave as if they’ve undergone some kind of austerity. Utter bolderdash. Gvt should have had the guts to do the same. People think they have anyway.0 -
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/10417936577105633280 -
We’re not all bankers. If you’ll pardon the expression.Benpointer said:
Just having retired from a bank, and knowing quite a few others who have retired from the City, I'd say that's not true.welshowl said:
El Dorado compared to anyone in the private sector.Freggles said:
http://www.nhsemployers.org/your-workforce/pay-and-reward/pensions/new-2015-schemewelshowl said:
You haven’t, sure. But your pensions have been protected by the tax payer, whilst the rest of us have seen the sums we need for our old age multiply as interest rates have gone subterranean.
The 2004 pension Act has destroyed final salary pension in the vast vast majority of the private sector. Especially those under about 45.0 -
Is there any evidence for that ?oxfordsimon said:
The attempted rape claim needs to be properly tested before it can be allowed to become a received fact. There are significant differences between the various versions of events described by the complainant. She is not even that certain as to which year it happened.Alistair said:The SCOTUS nomination is turning into a car crash for the Republicans. Hot on the heels of the attempted rape claim comes more whispers about what did Kavanaugh know about disgraced judge Alex Kozinski's behaviour when he clerked for him?
By holding this back until the very end of the process, the Democrats have made it very difficult for Kavanaugh to get an opportunity to challenge these serious accusations.
Which is probably why they acted in the way they did....
Feinstein, who had the original letter, has been criticised both for not real easing it, and also for releasing it - but what is eminently clear is that the woman herself wishes to pursue the matter.
And why would the Democrats owe Kavanaugh anything ?
0 -
*whispers very quietly* I agree...alex. said:
Whilst i agree to some extent - especially where education is concerned, NHS is a bit more problematic because of the extent to which there is a permanent stuggle to match public demand and expectation, the irony is that the problems in Local Government have not been solely caused by Central Government cuts, but by the "one size fits all" approach to restricting the ability of authorities to compensate by raising Council tax. The cuts were an opportunity to re-invigorate local democracy to some extent, by allowing local politicians to make genuine choices between raising taxes, making cuts, or finding 'painless' efficiencies, but this has been denied them. The irony being that previously relatively efficient authorities were actually penalised more because they had already made the efficiencies that others were now forced into, and had lower ability to raise taxes because of their inevitably lower tax basis.notme said:
Local gvt should be a case study of how you can take 40% out of a public service and it not make the slightest jot of difference to the service delivered. The struggle is led by increased social services demand and is only now hitting home. Local gvt has now reached a point where it needs to grow adult care greater than inflation.
We need to be rolling these kind of cuts across the board. Nhs and education behave as if they’ve undergone some kind of austerity. Utter bolderdash. Gvt should have had the guts to do the same. People think they have anyway.0 -
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..0 -
My Trust had no beds again today, in September. This is going to be another difficult winter.kle4 said:
I'd agree with pretty much all of that. It was an easy target, not entirely unreasonably, but people are now pretty complacent about just how much trouble is developing now.alex. said:
What is shocking to me is the apparent complete lack of understanding of the depth of the crisis that Local Government is in. Outside of those really experiencing it, i think even those who think they realise are underestimating the problems. Even some Councillors in affected authorities are only vaguely aware of the scale of what they are dealing with. The gap between public (and central government) perception and reality is shocking.notme said:
I think actually people aren’t dog too badly. Public services are pretty good, child poverty down, adult poverty down, pensioner poverty all but disappearing. The struggle has been to reduce cyclical spending without massive cuts. This has come about by a six year long public sector freeze. Predictably though is has resulted in a struggle to recruit and retain skilled public service staff. Did I also mention Full Employment?
I work for a London local authority, in finance, not at a vastly senior level, but with a level of experience that (especially given the turnover in recent years) means that i probably know more about how the place works than almost anyone else. My cost to the the tax payer (inclusive of oncosts - 'gold plated' pension, "generous" holidays etc etc) is probably around £250 a day. A generic replacement at my level, at current market rates would cost potentially north of £450 a day. And that's a generic replacement - anyone who works in a local authority knows that (outside of a few very specific areas) there is no such thing as a generic replacement - experience and inside knowledge is irreplaceable. How is it remotely possible to close that gap? Who's going to want to take a permanent role with generous holidays when you can work as an interim for the same salary and take 1/3 of the year off? When you can create your own gold plated pension all by yourself?
Once the public sector could rely on an element of "public sector ethos" and general goodwill from staff. These days when conditions are being regularly downgraded by benchmarking to the lowest common private sector comparator, when "job security" is only guaranteed by the pace of people fleeing exceeding the pace of cuts, this is increasingly a fantasy. The only reason people don't leave is because of inertia. Or because they are too close to retirement. But there is no new generation coming through. And none that will commit to the long term.0 -
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.welshowl said:
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....GIN1138 said:
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.williamglenn said:
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.0 -
It’s nit because of lack of cash.Foxy said:
My Trust had no beds again today, in September. This is going to be another difficult winter.kle4 said:
I'd agree with pretty much all of that. It was an easy target, not entirely unreasonably, but people are now pretty complacent about just how much trouble is developing now.alex. said:
What is shocking to me is the apparent complete lack of understanding of the depth of the crisis that Local Government is in. Outside of those really experiencing it, i think even those who think they realise are underestimating the problems. Even some Councillors in affected authorities are only vaguely aware of the scale of what they are dealing with. The gap between public (and central government) perception and reality is shocking.notme said:
I think actually people aren’t dog too badly. Public services are pretty good, child poverty down, adult poverty down, pensioner poverty all but disappearing. The struggle has been to reduce cyclical spending without massive cuts. This has come about by a six year long public sector freeze. Predictably though is has resulted in a struggle to recruit and retain skilled public service staff. Did I also mention Full Employment?
I work for a London local authority, in finance, not at a vastly senior level, but with a level of experience that (especially given the turnover in recent years) means that i probably know more about how the place works than almost anyone else. My cost to the the tax payer (inclusive of oncosts - 'gold plated' pension, "generous" holidays etc etc) is probably around £250 a day. A generic replacement at my level, at current market rates would cost potentially north of £450 a day. And that's a generic replacement - anyone who works in a local authority knows that (outside of a few very specific areas) there is no such thing as a generic replacement - experience and inside knowledge is irreplaceable. How is it remotely possible to close that gap? Who's going to want to take a permanent role with generous holidays when you can work as an interim for the same salary and take 1/3 of the year off? When you can create your own gold plated pension all by yourself?
Once the public sector could rely on an element of "public sector ethos" and general goodwill from staff. These days when conditions are being regularly downgraded by benchmarking to the lowest common private sector comparator, when "job security" is only guaranteed by the pace of people fleeing exceeding the pace of cuts, this is increasingly a fantasy. The only reason people don't leave is because of inertia. Or because they are too close to retirement. But there is no new generation coming through. And none that will commit to the long term.0 -
Check your privilege.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
-1 -
We're all privileged to be in this country. Check yours and look around the globe.Bromptonaut said:
Check your privilege.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..0 -
Newsnight having a completely one sided "Brexit is going to be terrible" debate with itself?0
-
Well good to see some reality reasserting itself after the last few days of puff pieces saying how a deal was now imminent. As I expected, the ‘movement’ on the NI backstop is just the EU saying they can use technology to make the Irish Sea border invisible (amazing that technology can work there but not at the real border...) - the EU still completely missing the point that a different regulatory regime in NI is unacceptable no matter how it works.rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
Now the French are comimg along saying a blind Brexit with a declaration nobody understands won’t work. And everyone is still in agreement that the customs partnership, the critical part of Chequers, won’t work. So basically, nothing at all seems to have changed.
No deal looks as clear as ever. All this seems to be about is gettng TM through the conference without getting humiliated by her own party members.0 -
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.0 -
My privilege (together with prudent financial management, it has to be said) means that I'm almost completely insulated from things like unemployment massively rising. So from a personal point of view I wouldn't have been hit by the disaster Brown was leading the country into, nor by the kind of high unemployment seen on mainland Europe. Osborne's management of the economy, succeeding in rescuing us from a situation where state was overspending by a gobsmacking 25%, whilst keeping unemployment low and falling over the period of his stewardship, was a spectacular success for those who aren't insulated like me from the downsides.Bromptonaut said:
Check your privilege.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..0 -
Agreed. Admittedly it’s the Guardian, so they might’ve taken the most Euro starry eyed 23 year old, fresh out of the box, who’s in charge of harmonising speed limit road signs out to lunch and poured two bottles of Chablis down him/her to extract such a quote, that fits their narrative, for all I know, but even so. Bloody clueless.rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
0 -
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.0 -
Stodge’s original point is right, though.Richard_Nabavi said:
My privilege (together with prudent financial management, it has to be said) means that I'm almost completely insulated from things like unemployment massively rising. So from a personal point of view I wouldn't have been hit by the disaster Brown was leading the country into, nor by the kind of high unemployment seen on mainland Europe. Osborne's management of the economy, succeeding in rescuing us from a situation where state was overspending by a gobsmacking 25%, whilst keeping unemployment low and falling over the period of his stewardship, was a spectacular success for those who aren't insulated like me from the downsides.Bromptonaut said:
Check your privilege.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
0 -
So this is our Darkest Hour? Really? That is really really unhelpfulPhilip_Thompson said:
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.welshowl said:
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....GIN1138 said:
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.williamglenn said:
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.0 -
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
0 -
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
0 -
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
0 -
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.0 -
May was ‘very clear’ that the backstop agreed in December was just a form of words to allow negotiations to move foward. She briefed out this message extensively. You are right that Barnier then acted with the total lack of good faith which illustrates why we should never agree to pay the money in return for a political declaration. But our leaders seem to delight in being stupid.Philip_Thompson said:
Except the breakthrough that was agreed in December is not the backstop that Barnier is claiming now. What Barnier is claiming now was vetoed in December by the DUP and not the agreement, its the breakthrough he wanted then but not the one he got then.CarlottaVance said:
He's just acting as if the DUP veto in December and subsequent changes to the agreement never happened now and people in the UK are letting him get away with it.
Yes, Baker and co should have resigned in December but as PT says, the declaration agreed then was sufficiently vague that they had a justification for carrying on. At least they eventually stood up to be counted.
Those of us who said in December that the NI backstop should never have been agreed at all have been proven right.0 -
You might also consider that the only reason this seems like the eleventh hour is the unseemly rush to confirm Kavanaugh.oxfordsimon said:
The attempted rape claim needs to be properly tested before it can be allowed to become a received fact. There are significant differences between the various versions of events described by the complainant. She is not even that certain as to which year it happened.Alistair said:The SCOTUS nomination is turning into a car crash for the Republicans. Hot on the heels of the attempted rape claim comes more whispers about what did Kavanaugh know about disgraced judge Alex Kozinski's behaviour when he clerked for him?
By holding this back until the very end of the process, the Democrats have made it very difficult for Kavanaugh to get an opportunity to challenge these serious accusations.
Which is probably why they acted in the way they did.
If he did it - then he should suffer accordingly. But trial by Democrat leaks is not fair for anyone. Not on Kavanaugh and not on the woman making the claims.
As for whispers about other things - they should be on the record or ignored. Gossip is not evidence of anything.
There is no good reason, for example, why the Democrats were given 15 hours to review 40,000 pages of documents not released until the eve of the hearing.0 -
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
0 -
Err:Nigelb said:
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."0 -
Err...Richard_Nabavi said:
Err:Nigelb said:
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...0 -
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.0 -
Well, if you ignore half of what I say, then yes I agree I didn't put it in context. It doesn't reflect well on your comprehension skills if you can't read on to the next sentence.Nigelb said:
Err...Richard_Nabavi said:
Err:Nigelb said:
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...0 -
Last time we had a 'darkest hour' we didn't give ground, as I understand it.MarqueeMark said:
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.0 -
Personally I cannot see " You've never had it so good" going down well as a campaign slogan in the next few years, but if you want to try canvassing with it on the Saffron Lane Estate, I would recommend a good pair of running shoes!Nigelb said:
Err...Richard_Nabavi said:
Err:Nigelb said:
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...0 -
I’ll stipulate that you put a silly claim in context, if that makes you happy.Richard_Nabavi said:
Well, if you ignore half of what I say, then yes I agree I didn't put it in context. It doesn't reflect well on your comprehension skills if you can't read on to the next sentence.Nigelb said:
Err...Richard_Nabavi said:
Err:Nigelb said:
Not in your original reply.Richard_Nabavi said:
I don't hand-wave it away, I put it in context.Nigelb said:
Which is why you do well to acknowledge the fact rather than hand waving it away.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, well a humongous financial crisis destroying huge amounts of value, following a period of binge, does tend to have that effect.Nigelb said:Stodge’s original point is right, though.
The last decade has not been great for most, however true (or not) it might be that the last administration did a reasonable job in mitigating the damage.
"That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK."
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens...
0 -
Battle of Britain language is rather absurd when cheerleading the forces of the hard right against liberal democratic international organisations.Richard_Nabavi said:
Last time we had a 'darkest hour' we didn't give ground, as I understand it.MarqueeMark said:
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.
And of course, the Battle of Britain and following years did break us as a worldwide power, indeed that was the reason we joined the EEC in the first place.0 -
Weak, weak, weak.Nigelb said:I’ll stipulate that you put a silly claim in context, if that makes you happy.
Enough banter. I'm off to bed, happy anyway!0 -
According to the Guardian's report (which frankly I think is a load of unattributed tosh), it's the EU who are using that rather unfortunate Battle of Britain language, comparing themselves to Nazi Germany.Foxy said:
Battle of Britain language is rather absurd when cheerleading the forces of the hard right against liberal democratic international organisations.Richard_Nabavi said:
Last time we had a 'darkest hour' we didn't give ground, as I understand it.MarqueeMark said:
Are the Germans going to be providing the Luftwaffe again for this darkest hour redux?rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
They really are fucking clueless if they said such a thing.
And of course, the Battle of Britain and following years did break us as a worldwide power, indeed that was the reason we joined the EEC in the first place.
Really I think the Guardian shouldn't be running such stuff as 'news'.0 -
I don't think so but its what the Guardian claim the EU spokesman is saying. I guess the EU spokesman thinks they are the Nazis? Or more likely didn't think at all.ExiledInScotland said:
So this is our Darkest Hour? Really? That is really really unhelpfulPhilip_Thompson said:
More than just one hundred years. Could go back nearly six centuries and say the same.welshowl said:
Indeed, much of the past hundred years history of Europe consists the fallout of Continentals assuming the Brits won’t do things the Brits have said they would do. Belgium 1914, Poland 1939, Brexit 2016.....GIN1138 said:
EU wants us to "stare into the abyss" and then we'll blink.williamglenn said:
Seems a dangerous assumption to me...
If anything this quote is far more likely to raise a British stiff upper lip and get us willing to stare down the abyss without flinching.0 -
The US is imposing new tariffs on $200bn (£150bn) worth of Chinese goods as it escalates its trade war with Beijing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-455557490 -
All the polling shows No deal would see Remain win a second referendum, thus ending Brexit.archer101au said:
Well good to see some reality reasserting itself after the last few days of puff pieces saying how a deal was now imminent. As I expected, the ‘movement’ on the NI backstop is just the EU saying they can use technology to make the Irish Sea border invisible (amazing that technology can work there but not at the real border...) - the EU still completely missing the point that a different regulatory regime in NI is unacceptable no matter how it works.rottenborough said:
Very poor choice of language by this EU official. Big mistake.welshowl said:
Do you post this stuff hoping we’ll be scared somehow?williamglenn said:
Because it’s not going to work.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1041793657710563328
Now the French are comimg along saying a blind Brexit with a declaration nobody understands won’t work. And everyone is still in agreement that the customs partnership, the critical part of Chequers, won’t work. So basically, nothing at all seems to have changed.
No deal looks as clear as ever. All this seems to be about is gettng TM through the conference without getting humiliated by her own party members.
If Brexit is going to succeed there has to be a deal and most likely that will require a transition period alongside the withdrawal agreement to negotiate0 -
Interesting. Most people seem to assume that China will win this sort of battle but I'm not so sure.FrancisUrquhart said:The US is imposing new tariffs on $200bn (£150bn) worth of Chinese goods as it escalates its trade war with Beijing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-455557490 -
There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.0 -
No one wins this sort of battle.AndyJS said:
Interesting. Most people seem to assume that China will win this sort of battle but I'm not so sure.FrancisUrquhart said:The US is imposing new tariffs on $200bn (£150bn) worth of Chinese goods as it escalates its trade war with Beijing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45555749
0 -
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.Y0kel said:There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.0 -
Could be disinformation I guess... https://twitter.com/rt_com/status/1041825323019583488?s=210
-
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT based on a statement by the Russian defence ministry. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet bar one Aussie site which speculates Israel may have been involved.AndyJS said:
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.Y0kel said:There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
https://www.rt.com/news/438673-russian-il20-disappears-radars/
https://www.themercury.com.au/news/world/fears-israel-has-shotdown-russian-spy-plane-during-raid-on-syria/news-story/137795732772ab4e772be5594c216c510 -
https://twitter.com/rabrowne75/status/1041829666565308416?s=21brendan16 said:
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet.AndyJS said:
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.Y0kel said:There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
https://www.rt.com/news/438673-russian-il20-disappears-radars/0 -
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you.
I see a lot that isn't right or positive whether it be well-run local authorities being forced to cut services because this Government is unable or unwilling to help them. I also see too many people, especially in London, struggling to survive, people who have to work long hours often in more than one job to pay for the basics of life.
Do I think Labour could do any better? No and I criticised them on here aplenty in the Blair and Brown years.
I'm not prepared to give any Government a free pass - I have a right to criticise, to question and to offer alternatives, that's called democracy last time I looked.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
0 -
So for once it wasn't Russian's on a stag do?williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/rabrowne75/status/1041829666565308416?s=21brendan16 said:
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet.AndyJS said:
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.Y0kel said:There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
https://www.rt.com/news/438673-russian-il20-disappears-radars/0 -
Coots are more than capable of crashing themselves without ever being shot down. The safety record of the Il-18/20/22 is fucking horrendous.brendan16 said:
The apparent disappearance of the Russian military plane with 14 people on board is being reported by RT based on a statement by the Russian defence ministry. As you say I don't see any coverage by western news sites yet bar one Aussie site which speculates Israel may have been involved.AndyJS said:
Thanks for informing us, I hadn't seen this on the news websites.Y0kel said:There appears to have been a very noticeable escalation in Syria this evening. Someone (most assumed to be Israel) has launched significant attacks on Syrian facilities very close to Russian facilities, reportedly inducing Russian operated air defences into action, a very rare event.
There is a rumour of a Russian aircraft thats disappeared off radar.
https://www.rt.com/news/438673-russian-il20-disappears-radars/
https://www.themercury.com.au/news/world/fears-israel-has-shotdown-russian-spy-plane-during-raid-on-syria/news-story/137795732772ab4e772be5594c216c510 -
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.Anazina said:
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.0 -
Take the idea of the detection of launch from a French frigate with a pinch of salt, not least some of their number has no such ripple launch surface to surface capability. There is no decisive evidence yet that the believed Israeli attack came from the air, there is the possibility the attack was launched from the sea.
Its the location of the targets that has led to this confused situation and possibly the unfortunate demise of the Coot. Those lads in Tel Aviv don't tend to get their targeting wrong but its a high risk area. If there is one thing Russia really doesn't want, its a confrontation with the Israelis in that region.0 -
Stand corrected, the French frigate in question does have surface to surface capability. Still, its an odd scenario.0
-
Gooood. The old biddies ruining it for everyone else
0 -
Is this the latest update? Seems a lot closer than most people are expecting:
"CBS News-YouGov House Model: Democrats 222, Republicans 213"
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/08/19/cbs-news-yougov-house-model-democrats-222-republic0 -
Off-topic:
Elon Musk in creating the Golgafrincham B Ark.0 -
I think that's probably about right.AndyJS said:Is this the latest update? Seems a lot closer than most people are expecting:
"CBS News-YouGov House Model: Democrats 222, Republicans 213"
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/08/19/cbs-news-yougov-house-model-democrats-222-republic0 -
What's wrong with the British Crime Survey?ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.0 -
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
OT Time magazine has been sold to the Salesforce (a cloud IT service for supporting enterprise sales teams) owner. This should not affect the Time Person of the Year, which we bet on: The announcement by Meredith said the Benioffs would not be involved in day-to-day operations or journalistic decisions at Time. Honest.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/sep/17/time-magazine-sold-marc-benioff-190m0 -
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.0 -
You say Clarke took on the white collar unions: some might say it was Clarke's attacks on those Conservative-voting professionals that cost the Tories the election.rcs1000 said:
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.0 -
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.another_richard said:
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.Anazina said:
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.0 -
Who wouldn't want to live in a place with 70% leavers?Anazina said:
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
https://metro.co.uk/video/two-women-fight-waiting-paul-nuttall-hartlepool-1455567/0 -
Ken Clarke wasn’t Chancellor on Black Wednesday.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
Plus by 1997 the Tories were more trusted on the economy than Labour.
In April 1997 the Tories had a 22% lead on the economy
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/best-party-key-issues-managing-economy0 -
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
He had Ed Balls for thatSquareRoot said:
Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
Well, I live pleasantly near Cambridge, and we could probably have quite a good lifestyle - perhaps even a better lifestyle - in the Hartlepool area on our existing salary.Anazina said:
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.another_richard said:
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.Anazina said:
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
The latter clause is probably the issue.0 -
You aren't Lord Heseltine by any chance?Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:He had Ed Balls for that
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4NB3neSNfmg0 -
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:
Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you..
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.0 -
Or as strange as @ralphmalph who lumps Iraq and Afghanistan with Tory errors.SquareRoot said:Its almost as strange as those who think Brown knew anything about economics/
Or for the matter of that, blames the Tory party for a total collapse in law and order (which I think is in any case an exaggeration) in a city run by a Labour figure.0 -
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Read it again if you don't believe me.0 -
Some years ago the Ku Klux Klan posted a link on their website to Westboro Street Baptist Church, with the disclaimer they did not endorse the views of that organisation.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
-
-
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.ydoethur said:
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Read it again if you don't believe me.0 -
I’d agree with that.rcs1000 said:
I would argue that Kenneth Clarke was the last Chancellor to encourage saving, through ISAs, PEPs and the like. Remember that trade deficits and surpluses have nothing to do with exchange rates, and everything to do with savings rates.DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's true that Ken Clarke left a great economic legacy, which lasted for a bit before Brown started making his own decisions. But crime was higher then, and most of the other things you complain of date back to then.ralphmalph said:
The ultimate political answer of a question.Richard_Nabavi said:
I'd be interested to know which golden age you are using as your baseline for comparison.ralphmalph said:
Only to the believers that pray to the god of GDP.Richard_Nabavi said:Sorry to butt in, but I was gobsmacked by that question. Yes of course the years since 2010 have been good ones for the country and all its citizens - probably the best since Maggie rescued the country from the horrors of the 1970s. That's not to say everything is easy or wonderful, but compared with the utter disaster inherited in 2010, and the dire predictions of 5 million unemployed, and the experience of comparable countries, this has without doubt been a good period in the UK.
We have experienced the consequences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Crimes that people experience and may not be reported in the stats is trough the roof.
The police can not be bothered to investigate.
London seems to be a war zone, stabbings, acid and moped crimes, let alone the riots.
Wages are stagnant, bosses are throwing 20 quid notes out of the window,
We are plagued by nuisance calls for PFI, etc.
The politicians are still clueless.
Social housing has collapsed.
The Govt has been sacking serving soldiers returning from active service,
The Govt has paid for people to harass and investigate ex-service people without giving them legal representation.
I could go on, but I will stop there.
But to answer your question the last time I think the UK felt comfortable with itslef was the end of Major and the early Blair years.
He also took on the white collar unions - the teachers, the medics and the lawyers. For which he also deserves credit.
From a domestic point of view, his policies were the right ones.0 -
The most shameful part of the Conservative record, in my view.Dura_Ace said:
19% reduction in the armed forces. So, there's that.stodge said:
I thought the idea was for Governments to stand on their record and it's not unreasonable for me, as a voter, to ask what the Conservatives have achieved since 2010.0 -
Three points:DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.ydoethur said:
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
0 -
I think the Republicans will take a hammering.rcs1000 said:
I think that's probably about right.AndyJS said:Is this the latest update? Seems a lot closer than most people are expecting:
"CBS News-YouGov House Model: Democrats 222, Republicans 213"
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/08/19/cbs-news-yougov-house-model-democrats-222-republic0 -
Stop trolling. What I said was so clear that even you knew what I meant.ydoethur said:
Three points:DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.ydoethur said:
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.0 -
It really, really wasn't clear. Or rather, it was clear and totally wrong, and you may notice I am not the only person to have pulled you up over it.DecrepitJohnL said:
Stop trolling. What I said was so clear that even you knew what I meant.ydoethur said:
Three points:DecrepitJohnL said:
Clarke's so-called golden legacy was actually the golden legacy of Black Wednesday when the Conservative government's economic policy disappeared in a puff of smoke with an immediate fall in interest rates and devaluation of the pound.ydoethur said:
But that is not what you said. You said Black Wednesday was his legacy.DecrepitJohnL said:
Yes. Hence the reference to Lamont's warbling in eight inches of water. Which has nothing to do with the point that the so-called golden legacy was caused by Black Wednesday and the fall in interest rates and devaluation.ydoethur said:
Strange remark. Clarke was not Chancellor on Black Wednesday - he was Home Secretary.DecrepitJohnL said:Clarke's great economic legacy being the total collapse of the Conservatives' economic policy on Black Wednesday followed by devaluation and a large fall in interest rates that had the previous Chancellor singing in the bath.
Read it again if you don't believe me.
1) You admit it was a golden legacy;
2) I would point out that the then Shadow Chancellor was furious not at the debacle of Black Wednesday but at the decision to withdraw from the ERM, which with hindsight was clearly the right decision (the stupid mistake, made by Major, was joining at all). The SCE at this time was a young political scientist called Gordon Brown;
3) That is still not what you said the first time. You may have phrased it poorly, but the fact is you were wrong.
I am also faintly surprised that repeating your own words back to you is considered 'trolling.'0 -
As I was informed when doing a deal in Algeria -Scott_P said:
"A contract is just a pause in our negotiations...."0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. Mark, one can be pro- or anti-Chequers, but I find the Gove line that we should negotiate any old shit deal, leave, then renegotiate to be utterly baffling.
Any deal we strike will likely last a long time and we should proceed on that basis. Assuming it'll be changed quickly, or easily, is just complacency and could see us lumbered with some vile capitulation.0 -
I wasn't particularly meaning to run down Hartlepool, more to point out that voters experience of the economy is not just their own individual experience. It encompasses the experience of their family, friends, and fellow townsfolk. We are empathetic beings, and working alongside others either suffering austerity (or prospering) influences our perceptions and voting behaviour.Dura_Ace said:
Who wouldn't want to live in a place with 70% leavers?Anazina said:
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.
https://metro.co.uk/video/two-women-fight-waiting-paul-nuttall-hartlepool-1455567/0 -
Sajid Javid, the home secretary, has suggested to colleagues that he wants to introduce limits and visas for EU citizens after Brexit.
In a move likely to cause tit-for-tat retaliation by Europe, the Home Office informed cabinet ministers last week of its intention to copy the existing migration system used to determine non-EU migration and apply it to Europeans who arrive in Britain after December 2020.
The new system, which is still being agreed across government, will be sold as a “global” migration system, ending free movement for the EU.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/3712652c-bac1-11e8-9e6e-515c1ae383690 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
If course, that renegotiation could go many ways, most likely to a closer relationship as the Remainers swell the ranks of those wanting EEA Single Market membership.Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. Mark, one can be pro- or anti-Chequers, but I find the Gove line that we should negotiate any old shit deal, leave, then renegotiate to be utterly baffling.
Any deal we strike will likely last a long time and we should proceed on that basis. Assuming it'll be changed quickly, or easily, is just complacency and could see us lumbered with some vile capitulation.
While cleary less good than full EU membership, EEA is probably the best option on the table, as it is off the shelf and easy to fit into established rules and regulations.0 -
Democrats still up about 30 seats though which would be a pretty large advance and likely see them take controlAndyJS said:Is this the latest update? Seems a lot closer than most people are expecting:
"CBS News-YouGov House Model: Democrats 222, Republicans 213"
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/08/19/cbs-news-yougov-house-model-democrats-222-republic0 -
Sure the Fitzwilliam museum is great and free to visit.Anazina said:
Lots to see and do in Cambridge for free. It’s one of the loveliest places in Britain and regularly does well in polls of towns and cities. I would guess the proportion of residents keen to trade it for Hartlepool is vanishingly small.another_richard said:
That depends on what suits your lifestyle and means.Anazina said:
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.
An expensive town filled with students and tourists is not necessarily to the liking of every person.
And while there's pretty architecture in the centre of Cambridge its suburbia is similar to that of any other town.
But how many times does the average person in Cambridge visit the Fitzwilliam museum each year ?
I'll have a guess at less than once.
The theatre / exhibitions / posh restaurant lifestyle really is pretty niche even in a place like Cambridge.0 -
Depends how you define nice, and there are probably lots of ways of doing so.Anazina said:
Not necessarily.another_richard said:
The irony being that the secretary would be more likely to be a home owner and have a better lifestyle in Hartlepool than Cambridge.Foxy said:
It is a simplification of couse, but the interesting JRT analysis of Brexit showed that those stuck in the middle in different areas were affected by their peers. Those in prosperous parts were more likely to vote Remain, while the same profile in less prosperous parts were inclined to Leave. People are affected by their environment, so a secretary in Hartlepool would vote differently to one in Cambridge.another_richard said:
I'd say it is much more mixed up.Foxy said:
I think that whether you live in the SE of England, or a similar microgeography affects perceptions. For much of the remainder of the country it has been a decade of stagnation at best, with continued erosion of wages. London and the SE struggle with some of the problems of wealth, such as the cost of housing, but for much of the rest that is a taste of honey that they will never get. Just grinding austerity and the feeling of being left behind. Brexit is a symptom, not the cure of such ills.notme said:stodge said:
Let's try it the other way, do you think the years since 2010 have been good ones for this country and all its citizens? Yes, some have done well, you personally may have done well, good luck to you.
I see a lot that isn't right or positive whether it be well-run local authorities being forced to cut services because this Government is unable or unwilling to help them. I also see too many people, especially in London, struggling to survive, people who have to work long hours often in more than one job to pay for the basics of life.
Do I think Labour could do any better? No and I criticised them on here aplenty in the Blair and Brown years.
I'm not prepared to give any Government a free pass - I have a right to criticise, to question and to offer alternatives, that's called democracy last time I looked.
There's a lot of poverty in London and parts of the SE with collapsing levels of home ownership and what I term middle class regression.
But equally lots of people are doing very nicely in what are thought of as deprived areas.
In many ways its easier to be rich in a poor town than in a rich town and likewise easier to be poor in a rich town than a poor town.
Relative contrasts matter both financially and psychologically.
Cambridge is a lot nicer than Hartlepool.
Just look around.0
This discussion has been closed.