politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The betting chances of LAB winning the next election edge down
Comments
-
Yes, they are the party of ideas, ideas for Socialism, which by definition the Tories opposerottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.0 -
Canada died tonightHYUFD said:Nadine Dorries on Peston says we need a Canada style Deal and if May does not switch to that she will have to go
0 -
The Tory campaign was the worst in living memory. Good alone knows why they didn't attack all this. I strongly suspect May was told to just repeat Strong and Stable and so she did, endlessly. No flexible planning.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/
0 -
Oh yes, I agree, and I can't bear his airline.welshowl said:
True, and that wouldn’t be good. But O’Leary get up my nose.Anazina said:
Although not so much for the 7,000 or so air hostesses he employs...welshowl said:
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
I read an interview with him the other (and old one, from Marketing Week or some such) where he bollocked his publicist for attempting to issue a denial that he'd banned his head office staff from charging their phones for free. When he asked her why she was doing trying to deny it, the publicist said, "because it makes us look cheap, nasty and penny-pinching" or words to that effect. He said "good" – he wanted to come across as cheap, nasty and penny-pinching as that reminded the public that RyanAir were cheap.0 -
We must at least try for itwelshowl said:
Canada would be great.HYUFD said:
Turkey is in the Customs Union.Gardenwalker said:
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%LordOfReason said:
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.HYUFD said:
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoidedBig_G_NorthWales said:
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voiceskle4 said:
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I do not understand your commentwilliamglenn said:The denials are getting louder. It can only mean one thing.
https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1045020311207510016
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
Canada does its own trade deals, including the one it has with the EU, has no free movement from the EU, and is free from ECJ jurisdiction and the regulations and directives of the EU0 -
My local record shop closed down. Was very popular if not massively profitable. Issue: imports vast majority of stock from EU. If there is no trade deal, then cost of importing rises 20% due to customs duties. Had to make a decision as the lease was due for renewal on the shop. Decided to close down. Undoubtedly Brexit was a major factor.Mortimer said:
Darn. That’s my Brexit plan down the toiletGardenwalker said:
Good for you.Mortimer said:
My business has literally never done better than since the Referendum.Gardenwalker said:Nothing better than watching the PB Tories minge and whinge about Corbyn’s impact on the economy wile overlooking Brexit’s utter economic lunacy.
It’s a toss up between Corbyn and Brexit frankly.
“Hilariously”, we may get both. Brexit probably begets Corbyn.
With all due respect, we can’t build the future economy on antiquarian book dealing.
0 -
Polly's got one foot in Jezza's camp for now...rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
0 -
November hopefullyAnazina said:
Yes, I think so. However, I do think she is deliberately running down the clock as she knows that the nearer she gets to d-day the easier it will be to extract concessions from the hardliners on both sides.HYUFD said:
Seems too clever by half even for MayAnazina said:
Indeed that would be sheer genius if it was planned. However, it seems unlikely.HYUFD said:
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the oppositionkle4 said:
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
This is why I ultimately think she will get a deal – but not this side of Christmas.0 -
Indeed. Terrible ideas, but ideas at least.rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
The Tories only have Brexit, ie anti economy, anti wealth makers, anti foreigners.0 -
I hope so but my head says otherwiseAnazina said:
Yes, I think so. However, I do think she is deliberately running down the clock as she knows that the nearer she gets to d-day the easier it will be to extract concessions from the hardliners on both sides.HYUFD said:
Seems too clever by half even for MayAnazina said:
Indeed that would be sheer genius if it was planned. However, it seems unlikely.HYUFD said:
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the oppositionkle4 said:
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
This is why I ultimately think she will get a deal – but not this side of Christmas.0 -
Yep, well many of us pointed out at the time that we couldn't understand why on earth the Conservatives weren't pouncing on the numbers. Initially it looked as though they were biding their time for the big onslaught, but the big onslaught never came. It was a spectacular failure.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/0 -
The same Cammo who promised us a referendum? Who said it was a choice between stability under the Tories and chaos and confusion under Ed Miliband?tyson said:Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
What a load of kerfuffle you Tories have landed us in...begging bowls to Trump, scrapping around for little bits of leftovers from Europe....
Wouldn't life had just been so much easier if we had been left Cammo, Osbo and Cleggy at the helm, and none off this Brexit bobbins? I'd take it0 -
Canada is possible but needs a Tory majority at another general election in all likelihood unless it can get enough Labour Leavers to counteract losses to the DUPBig_G_NorthWales said:
Then Norway it is - no problem for me. Canada died tonight with the DUP statementHYUFD said:
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent pollsAnazina said:HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers0 -
I respect your views but I do not like the unnecessary bracketed words.Gardenwalker said:
Sadly, “crawling back to the EU” is the right thing for the country and our children.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have not sought a hard Brexit if you have followed my posts. I have been consistent that TM deal is for me, however I want out and could not countemance us crawling back to the EU.welshowl said:
Interestingly reading, the French press, the very uncertainty is beginning to generate a few twitchy articles too. I read a fascinating one today ( can’t for the life of me recall where!! Le Monde?) where the essential thrust was the EU have been all technocratic about the Irish border and wanting to get into all the knotty detail about shipping flows via Belfast or Dublin etc, which is reasonable per se, whereas here the debate is more existentially political about sovereignty, which they didn’t see coming with such vehemence, and maybe they’ve made a bit of a boob, because both sides are in a corner as a result.Gardenwalker said:It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
And there is no need for your words in brackets
It pains me to see the country humbled, and of course part of me would love us to tell the EU to stick it up their junta, but there it is.
I want TM to do the deal0 -
She does not have the numbers. Bring it on NadineHYUFD said:Nadine Dorries on Peston says we need a Canada style Deal and if May does not switch to that she will have to go
0 -
I think it will be Norway+CU and some sort of Liechtenstein-style fig-leaf on FoM. Peter Hitchens, that well-known europhile, has been punting this exact solution. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6197645/PETER-HITCHENS-Norway-escape-PM-begging-Brussels.htmlHYUFD said:
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent pollsAnazina said:HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers0 -
If May persists with Chequers to the end even risking No Deal in the process, then the ERG+ Tory Remainers do have the votes to topple her combinedBig_G_NorthWales said:
She does not have the numbers. Bring it on NadineHYUFD said:Nadine Dorries on Peston says we need a Canada style Deal and if May does not switch to that she will have to go
0 -
We already have UK deals with Boeing. It does not have to be either orFoxy said:
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good ideaFoxy said:
The devil is always in the detail.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade dealSouthamObserver said:
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?0 -
I could just about live with that provided the Liechtenstein style FOM fig leafAnazina said:
I think it will be Norway+CU and some sort of Liechtenstein-style fig-leaf on FoM. Peter Hitchens, that well-known europhile, has been punting this exact solution. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6197645/PETER-HITCHENS-Norway-escape-PM-begging-Brussels.htmlHYUFD said:
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent pollsAnazina said:HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers0 -
So what do we want that we cannot have already?Big_G_NorthWales said:
We already have UK deals with Boeing. It does not have to be either orFoxy said:
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good ideaFoxy said:
The devil is always in the detail.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade dealSouthamObserver said:
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?
What is it that 66% want?
0 -
I did wonder why TM was so adamant about Chequers and why the cabinet endorsed her position.HYUFD said:
Canada is possible but needs a Tory majority at another general election in all likelihood unless it can get enough Labour Leavers to counteract losses to the DUPBig_G_NorthWales said:
Then Norway it is - no problem for me. Canada died tonight with the DUP statementHYUFD said:
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent pollsAnazina said:HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers
Tonight you have had the answer and Canada has died0 -
I can live with Norway or any +++ beyond but a deal must be madeHYUFD said:
I could just about live with that provided the Liechtenstein style FOM fig leafAnazina said:
I think it will be Norway+CU and some sort of Liechtenstein-style fig-leaf on FoM. Peter Hitchens, that well-known europhile, has been punting this exact solution. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6197645/PETER-HITCHENS-Norway-escape-PM-begging-Brussels.htmlHYUFD said:
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent pollsAnazina said:HYUFD said:
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.williamglenn said:
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers0 -
Trade deal sounds good. But it's all guff. There is no detail. Perhaps we'll get tariff free Pretzels and they get shortbread. That would count as a deal wouldn't it?Foxy said:
So what do we want that we cannot have already?Big_G_NorthWales said:
We already have UK deals with Boeing. It does not have to be either orFoxy said:
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good ideaFoxy said:
The devil is always in the detail.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade dealSouthamObserver said:
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?
What is it that 66% want?0 -
Maybe they just like the US. Trump will not be there foreverFoxy said:
So what do we want that we cannot have already?Big_G_NorthWales said:
We already have UK deals with Boeing. It does not have to be either orFoxy said:
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good ideaFoxy said:
The devil is always in the detail.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade dealSouthamObserver said:
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?
What is it that 66% want?0 -
Exactly! The grass is always greener. I don’t want to come over all Schopenhauer, but you’ve nailed it fox.Foxy said:
Yes, it is a great image.LordOfReason said:
It’s art. And in art surely a difference between sexist (unfair) and realist (fair enough it’s real)Foxy said:
To be fair, it is sexist, demeaning both make and female. It is however quite funny by means of highlighting such sexism and much humour is based on transgression of social norms.FrancisUrquhart said:Distracted Boyfriend meme is sexist, rules Swedish ad watchdog
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/26/distracted-boyfriend-meme-sexist-swedish-advertising
Ever since I saw it I have so loved that photograph. It is soooooo enigmatic. So much of the Human Condition is right there. It works. It’s believable. As the first model walking to camera is unaware what’s unfolding, she has a natural innocence. For me the second girl invokes a sympathy, she is in a game she can’t win, she is the limping miner in Galaxy Quest.
As well as funny, the whole thing together is kinda sexy.
Is it just me, or when they try it with the gender roles reversed, it’s just not the same? Straight away the laughter stops. A cloud passes the sun. Instead of warm, it is cold.
https://www.belladasemana.com.br/pt-br/blog/2564/50-delas-mantem-o-famoso-"estepe"
If so, why?
I think what makes it is that the two girls are near doubles. The grass is always greener...
What more to add? The passions of men are commonly more potent than their reason?0 -
Yes, I think Labour have had a good conference, coming out more united, and despite all the wheeler dealing, coming out with some decent policies. It was wise to not let Brexit take too much limelight, but also to not let it be ignoredGardenwalker said:
Indeed. Terrible ideas, but ideas at least.rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
The Tories only have Brexit, ie anti economy, anti wealth makers, anti foreigners.
I am not a fan of McDonnells solutions to the problems of modern capitalism, but am glad that at least the questions are finally being asked at a high level.
The conference had a fair bit to interest those a little bored of Brexit. I think that the Tories may struggle to do the same.0 -
Monbiot had a dig at Tuscany second home owners in his column today.GIN1138 said:
Polly's got one foot in Jezza's camp for now...rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.0 -
Lights out
Have a good nights rest everyone
Good night folks0 -
Polly with soon fall out with Jezza when she realizes he's leading her up the garden path over Brexit.rottenborough said:
Monbiot had a dig at Tuscany second home owners in his column today.GIN1138 said:
Polly's got one foot in Jezza's camp for now...rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past. 0 -
Yes, I think that it just means that 66% of the country like the USA!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Maybe they just like the US. Trump will not be there foreverFoxy said:
So what do we want that we cannot have already?Big_G_NorthWales said:
We already have UK deals with Boeing. It does not have to be either orFoxy said:
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good ideaFoxy said:
The devil is always in the detail.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade dealSouthamObserver said:
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.Big_G_NorthWales said:TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?
What is it that 66% want?
Nothing more than that, but to like the country does not mean we need a Trade Deal. After all that is the status quo, and we do trade pretty freely (though curiously both UK and USA claim that the balance of trade is in their favour).0 -
Now, now Foxy, don't take like that. This is one of those posts in which I was flying a bit of a kite to be shot down and I do not underestimate the political difficulty in such a proposal but, that said, I don't see how British customs officers patrolling Dublin even remotely comes into it.Foxy said:
What an excellent Idea. The arrangement could be administered by a British Viceroy in Dublin, and we could create a natty black and tan uniform for the customs officers required.Pro_Rata said:
Might an administratively, if not politically, pragmatic solution be 'a' Customs Union between the UK and RoI? Given the RoI trades more with the UK than across it this would minimise impact on Ireland. Ireland would, of course, retain SM and EZ, but might bear a heavier Rules of Origin burden. We could include free ports for Irish goods to export to the EU with minimal burden - Rosslare certainly, but perhaps also a dedicated Irish lane at a smaller English channel port or two.
Initially tarriffs would not diverge from the EUs, meaning little barrier between RoI and EU. This would give time for RoI to decide whether to go fully with a joint UK/RoI tarriffs schedule or to stay with EU tarriffs rate, diverging from the UK and operating a private tarriff forwarding system between itself the UK, whilst semi retaining a customs link to the EU - the RoI would then become a sort of intermediate customs territory.
Like I say, this probably wouldn't fly politically, except in no deal crisis resolution, but is there any merit at all in thinking this might be a solution to the various border issues.
Who could object to that?
What I wanted to figure was whether, putting aside the politics, such a proposal had any purely technical merit and whether, because a fair wedge of Irish trade is with the UK or travels across the UK, it would actually lower barriers to post-Brexit Irish trade. I don't presume to have come up with something nobody else in HMG has thought of, I'm sure a proposal on these lines is sitting in a Brexit department shredder somewhere. But if it is arrant nonsense then, amongst all the other arrant nonsense proposed for the Irish border, what, practically, makes such an arrangement worse?
0 -
rottenborough said:
Monbiot had a dig at Tuscany second home owners in his column today.
Mind you George Minbiot is totally crackers as well.
He appears to saying he wants to prevent "Climate Breakdown" (since when did "Global Warming" aka "Climate Change" become "Climate Breakdown" ?) by having a 50 year depression and making us all go back to living by candlelight in wooden shacks.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/26/economic-growth-fossil-fuels-habit-oil-industry
What a nutcase...0 -
"“If you can show me one person in Aldershot who’s happy, I’ll give you a free haircut,” promised Giovanni Gomma, a barber, in the centre of the Hampshire district that has been declared the happiest in the UK.
Gomma, 61, who has run his Gomma’s Haircare salon on Station Road for 45 years, said the Office of National Statistics (ONS) – which revealed its findings on Wednesday – must have got its calculations wrong “or maybe the whole country isn’t very happy”."
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/26/people-here-want-to-be-lifted-hampshire-town-is-happiest-uk-place0 -
I did have my tongue in cheek!Pro_Rata said:
Now, now Foxy, don't take like that. This is one of those posts in which I was flying a bit of a kite to be shot down and I do not underestimate the political difficulty in such a proposal but, that said, I don't see how British customs officers patrolling Dublin even remotely comes into it.Foxy said:
What an excellent Idea. The arrangement could be administered by a British Viceroy in Dublin, and we could create a natty black and tan uniform for the customs officers required.Pro_Rata said:
Might an administratively, if not politically, pragmatic solution be 'a' Customs Union between the UK and RoI? Given the RoI trades more with the UK than across it this would minimise impact on Ireland. Ireland would, of course, retain SM and EZ, but might bear a heavier Rules of Origin burden. We could include free ports for Irish goods to export to the EU with minimal burden - Rosslare certainly, but perhaps also a dedicated Irish lane at a smaller English channel port or two.
Initially tarriffs would not diverge from the EUs, meaning little barrier between RoI and EU. This would give time for RoI to decide whether to go fully with a joint UK/RoI tarriffs schedule or to stay with EU tarriffs rate, diverging from the UK and operating a private tarriff forwarding system between itself the UK, whilst semi retaining a customs link to the EU - the RoI would then become a sort of intermediate customs territory.
Like I say, this probably wouldn't fly politically, except in no deal crisis resolution, but is there any merit at all in thinking this might be a solution to the various border issues.
Who could object to that?
What I wanted to figure was whether, putting aside the politics, such a proposal had any purely technical merit and whether, because a fair wedge of Irish trade is with the UK or travels across the UK, it would actually lower barriers to post-Brexit Irish trade. I don't presume to have come up with something nobody else in HMG has thought of, I'm sure a proposal on these lines is sitting in a Brexit department shredder somewhere. But if it is arrant nonsense then, amongst all the other arrant nonsense proposed for the Irish border what, practically, makes such an arrangement worse?
I think though in the centenary of an independent Ireland that they will have a British Brexit forced upon them.
Ireland has changed, and in my view much for the better in the post DeValera era. In 1970, 90% of Irish exports came to the UK, but now it is 15% . Ireland may be significantly damaged by Brexit, but it is going to stay in the EU. It does not want to be ruled from Britain again, preferring the autonomy of the EU membership. A Union is how the small can stand up to the large.0 -
Exactly Mr Rotten. The ideas can be absolute rubbish, but future always beats the past. As the clever fox says, the grass is always greener. This blog is waking up. People nailing it all over the place tonight.rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
McDonnell and Corbyn will end up deliriously happy if the Tories merely continue like they are. Britain today has right conditions for a sea change. Globalisation ravaging confidence of the people and their aspirations for their offspring, the governing party of many years perceived as barking up the EU tree, steering us into mercantile rivalry with our nearest geographical and cultural neighbours. the conservatives Need to show they using time in power recognising and tackling the real causes of Britain’s decline and pain: globalisation, post-industrial Britain, and our demographic time bomb. Not that I am saying rival parties win by exploiting this ground with stronger policy, as I say they can get elected with even weaker policy. It’s that photograph again, always looking at the grass on the other side.
If Toby Young wants Tories to win he has to stop signing up to Labour to vote for Corbin, instead sign up for Tories and start feeding them policies to tackle globalisation, post-industrial Britain, and our demographic time bomb. Because the human condition is the Tories real opponent.0 -
Copeland in second place, and Blaby in Leics in 4th. Colour me a bit sceptical too!AndyJS said:"“If you can show me one person in Aldershot who’s happy, I’ll give you a free haircut,” promised Giovanni Gomma, a barber, in the centre of the Hampshire district that has been declared the happiest in the UK.
Gomma, 61, who has run his Gomma’s Haircare salon on Station Road for 45 years, said the Office of National Statistics (ONS) – which revealed its findings on Wednesday – must have got its calculations wrong “or maybe the whole country isn’t very happy”."
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/26/people-here-want-to-be-lifted-hampshire-town-is-happiest-uk-place
Blaby is quite a pleasant but dull suburb of Leicester, but 4th happiest place in the country? If so, then I pity the rest!0 -
ONS have no idea. Everyone knows the happiest place in the UK is the Scottish island of Todday.Foxy said:
Copeland in second place, and Blaby in Leics in 4th. Colour me a bit sceptical too!AndyJS said:"“If you can show me one person in Aldershot who’s happy, I’ll give you a free haircut,” promised Giovanni Gomma, a barber, in the centre of the Hampshire district that has been declared the happiest in the UK.
Gomma, 61, who has run his Gomma’s Haircare salon on Station Road for 45 years, said the Office of National Statistics (ONS) – which revealed its findings on Wednesday – must have got its calculations wrong “or maybe the whole country isn’t very happy”."
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/26/people-here-want-to-be-lifted-hampshire-town-is-happiest-uk-place
Blaby is quite a pleasant but dull suburb of Leicester, but 4th happiest place in the country? If so, then I pity the rest!0 -
May tried tackling the demographic time bomb at last manifesto launch. It involved placing a bomb under her whole campaign.LordOfReason said:
Exactly Mr Rotten. The ideas can be absolute rubbish, but future always beats the past. As the clever fox says, the grass is always greener. This blog is waking up. People nailing it all over the place tonight.rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
McDonnell and Corbyn will end up deliriously happy if the Tories merely continue like they are. Britain today has right conditions for a sea change. Globalisation ravaging confidence of the people and their aspirations for their offspring, the governing party of many years perceived as barking up the EU tree, steering us into mercantile rivalry with our nearest geographical and cultural neighbours. the conservatives Need to show they using time in power recognising and tackling the real causes of Britain’s decline and pain: globalisation, post-industrial Britain, and our demographic time bomb. Not that I am saying rival parties win by exploiting this ground with stronger policy, as I say they can get elected with even weaker policy. It’s that photograph again, always looking at the grass on the other side.
If Toby Young wants Tories to win he has to stop signing up to Labour to vote for Corbin, instead sign up for Tories and start feeding them policies to tackle globalisation, post-industrial Britain, and our demographic time bomb. Because the human condition is the Tories real opponent.
But seriously, the Tories are in real trouble unless they start coming up with some ideas, other than slashing corporation tax and Javid's bonkers idea to get rid of the only just introduced auto-enrolment for pensions.0 -
A combination of Hammond sulking - and May's clown troupe letting him.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yep, well many of us pointed out at the time that we couldn't understand why on earth the Conservatives weren't pouncing on the numbers. Initially it looked as though they were biding their time for the big onslaught, but the big onslaught never came. It was a spectacular failure.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/0 -
What I am saying is completely straightforward and fact. It’s down to the elders in this country today to make this decision, because all the children coming on board with voting age don’t know what’s good for them. You don’t have to like that, but it’s the fact, this was taken out of representative democracy, given to a one off direct democracy, and the 2016 result is the elders of this country deciding what’s good for all the kids and grandkids.Anazina said:
You imply that there's a strong cohort effect favouring Remain (which caused a bit of an argument on here the other night).LordOfReason said:
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.HYUFD said:Big_G_NorthWales said:kle4 said:
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I do not understand your commentwilliamglenn said:The denials are getting louder. It can only mean one thing.
https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1045020311207510016
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
What is the sense of effecting a policy – Leave – whose proponents are, by your own implication, dying out? This is not a question about the democratic rights and wrongs of it, merely the sense in doing so with such a strong cohort effect running against it.
Those are the facts, it’s best leave it there, if we start discussing merits of representative democracy over direct democracy, a weakness of one off direct democracy being a bonkers campaign with many not entirely sure what they are ending up with or even what it all means, then we in danger of being here all night.0 -
That is the reason that Irexit is swivel eyed Brexiteer fantasy. I home in on Customs Union because elsewhere that is something predicated on the transport geography, such as the Italian and German exclaves under the Swiss customs system. And I can't imagine any such arrangement being purely UK dictated. In fact, in no deal, Ireland might come to resent the EU pressuring them into enforcing a hard border at WTO demand.Foxy said:
I did have my tongue in cheek!Pro_Rata said:
Now, now Foxy, don't take like that. This is one of those posts in which I was flying a bit of a kite to be shot down and I do not underestimate the political difficulty in such a proposal but, that said, I don't see how British customs officers patrolling Dublin even remotely comes into it.Foxy said:
What an excellent Idea. The arrangement could be administered by a British Viceroy in Dublin, and we could create a natty black and tan uniform for the customs officers required.Pro_Rata said:
Might an administratively, if not politically, pragmatic solution be 'a' Customs Union between the UK and RoI? Given the RoI trades more with the UK than across it this would minimise impact on Ireland. Ireland would, of course, retain SM and EZ, but might bear a heavier Rules of Origin burden. We could include free ports for Irish goods to export to the EU with minimal burden - Rosslare certainly, but perhaps also a dedicated Irish lane at a smaller English channel port or two.
Who could object to that?
What I wanted to figure was whether, putting aside the politics, such a proposal had any purely technical merit and whether, because a fair wedge of Irish trade is with the UK or travels across the UK, it would actually lower barriers to post-Brexit Irish trade. I don't presume to have come up with something nobody else in HMG has thought of, I'm sure a proposal on these lines is sitting in a Brexit department shredder somewhere. But if it is arrant nonsense then, amongst all the other arrant nonsense proposed for the Irish border what, practically, makes such an arrangement worse?
I think though in the centenary of an independent Ireland that they will have a British Brexit forced upon them.
Ireland has changed, and in my view much for the better in the post DeValera era. In 1970, 90% of Irish exports came to the UK, but now it is 15% . Ireland may be significantly damaged by Brexit, but it is going to stay in the EU. It does not want to be ruled from Britain again, preferring the autonomy of the EU membership. A Union is how the small can stand up to the large.
Even if the answer is a flat spluttering no, we could take Ireland's disbelief at the suggestion of a Customs border in Forties and point out how that is not even more so with a customs border in Malin.0 -
I think the most effective thing Toby Young could do to stop Corbyn would be to make out he is a genuine supporter and try to strongly associate himself with Corbyn. I imagine the majority of Labour voters who pay him any kind of attention find him to be completely repellent.LordOfReason said:
If Toby Young wants Tories to win he has to stop signing up to Labour to vote for Corbin, instead sign up for Tories and start feeding them policies to tackle globalisation, post-industrial Britain, and our demographic time bomb. Because the human condition is the Tories real opponent.rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
Onto the ideas section I think it is a huge struggle for the Tories to do so as you have Brexit which eats up everything and causes division as well as the fatigue setting in from being in office for a long time. May seemed to have some plans when she first came in which people reacted to well but that has died and now even if ideas are coming through they will be hard to enact.
They are to blame for their current situation but the current situation is one that makes it very difficult for them to move forward even with the best will in the world.
0 -
Rotten borough said: May tried tackling the demographic time bomb at last manifesto launch. It involved placing a bomb under her whole campaign.
Okay. Let’s nail this one too tonight, as we are on a roll.
In Conservative Manifesto, clear policy for a state-backed equity release scheme to fund social care budget. That rising social care costs are a problem cannot be disputed, it needs addressing if you are serious about your stint in government. Tory manifesto looked a little half baked on dementia tax detail, who would lose their house for example, but ultimately the proposal of taking from inheritance to pay for care was explicit, it was a policy solution.
Observing blue on blue discussing dementia tax on PB, some adamant they couldn’t sell it on doorstep, insane to put vote-losers in the manifesto; countering that argument if you simply drop it, it leaves you policy lite for fairly dealing with rising cost of social care. How policy lite do you want your manifesto, if you need to embark on the right course having won power? Again I say the true opponent isn’t the other parties manifesto, it is your own desire to be re-elected having done the right thing, or elected proposing right change. Firstly, consider consequence of electoral expediency or shortermism across most areas of policy, environment obviously, where the solutions are long term, likewise impact on tax and state provision to cover the demographic time bomb. Secondly, consider talent and courage in your leaders required to market and sell painful or long term policy solutions. in the debate on here my sympathy lay with the Tories who appreciated where you don’t impose your own policy, you come to own the default situation, ironically in this example the default is something that Does resemble a Dementia Tax, of the most unprogressive kind.0 -
I think it more that May's team locked Hammond in the cupboard for the duration, and then briefed against him by saying that he would shortly not be CoE.MarqueeMark said:
A combination of Hammond sulking - and May's clown troupe letting him.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yep, well many of us pointed out at the time that we couldn't understand why on earth the Conservatives weren't pouncing on the numbers. Initially it looked as though they were biding their time for the big onslaught, but the big onslaught never came. It was a spectacular failure.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/
I think he shows real compassion and forgivenrss in how he has supported her since, not least with the cough sweets during her nightmare speech at last years conference.
What could go worse for her this year? surely the bar has been set so low that the only way is up? but then she always seems to manage a new low...0 -
They thought they were 5-0 up, so just needed to pass the ball around in their own half.rottenborough said:
The Tory campaign was the worst in living memory. Good alone knows why they didn't attack all this.
Turns out they were actually only 2-0 up, and scored an own goal near the end ......
0 -
She could always go for this kind of conference set. Screen print, of course, you wouldn't want her taken out by a giant falling T.May!Foxy said:
I think it more that May's team locked Hammond in the cupboard for the duration, and then briefed against him by saying that he would shortly not be CoE.MarqueeMark said:
A combination of Hammond sulking - and May's clown troupe letting him.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yep, well many of us pointed out at the time that we couldn't understand why on earth the Conservatives weren't pouncing on the numbers. Initially it looked as though they were biding their time for the big onslaught, but the big onslaught never came. It was a spectacular failure.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/
I think he shows real compassion and forgivenrss in how he has supported her since, not least with the cough sweets during her nightmare speech at last years conference.
What could go worse for her this year? surely the bar has been set so low that the only way is up? but then she always seems to manage a new low...
http://m.zimbio.com/photos/Ines+Arrimadas/Demonstrations+Barcelona+Ahead+Next+Week+Elections/_AWiH_s_4_d0 -
You seem to know nothing.LordOfReason said:Rotten borough said: May tried tackling the demographic time bomb at last manifesto launch. It involved placing a bomb under her whole campaign.
Okay. Let’s nail this one too tonight, as we are on a roll.
In Conservative Manifesto, clear policy for a state-backed equity release scheme to fund social care budget. That rising social care costs are a problem cannot be disputed, it needs addressing if you are serious about your stint in government. Tory manifesto looked a little half baked on dementia tax detail, who would lose their house for example, but ultimately the proposal of taking from inheritance to pay for care was explicit, it was a policy solution.
It is the present policy -- set up originally by the Blaiir Gov't -- that dementia patients lose their home.
I know, because it happened to my mother.
It is difficult to understand how May managed to get her name attached to Blair's half-baked policy.
0 -
Get the popcorn in. When does the action start. Do we get chance to finish the golf without missing something?Foxy said:
I think it more that May's team locked Hammond in the cupboard for the duration, and then briefed against him by saying that he would shortly not be CoE.MarqueeMark said:
A combination of Hammond sulking - and May's clown troupe letting him.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yep, well many of us pointed out at the time that we couldn't understand why on earth the Conservatives weren't pouncing on the numbers. Initially it looked as though they were biding their time for the big onslaught, but the big onslaught never came. It was a spectacular failure.FrancisUrquhart said:The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/
I think he shows real compassion and forgivenrss in how he has supported her since, not least with the cough sweets during her nightmare speech at last years conference.
What could go worse for her this year? surely the bar has been set so low that the only way is up? but then she always seems to manage a new low...
Seriously, the media have given Labour a working over this week.
Not one patsy interview. Even the Jon Snow interview was brutal on Corbyn. Crick chasing them down stairwells, into disabled toilets. If the vote was 96 v 4 all channels were giving the 4 screen time, then summing up: there you are, split down the middle. One MP went OTT for a general strike and the video eclipsed everything else as headlines.
May and the Tories ready for all this scrutiny, brutal interviews and mischief making?
Rudd’s intervention does seem another significant moment, We know about the ERG, Boris, Davies and what their views are, but what May and her business managers really really really don’t need is lots of 2nd ref and remain going into voxpops and endlessly looped on news channels, it will embolden EU to see it.0 -
You say I know nothing, but i know the same as you as I am agreeing with you. Take another lookYBarddCwsc said:
You seem to know nothing.LordOfReason said:Rotten borough said: May tried tackling the demographic time bomb at last manifesto launch. It involved placing a bomb under her whole campaign.
Okay. Let’s nail this one too tonight, as we are on a roll.
In Conservative Manifesto, clear policy for a state-backed equity release scheme to fund social care budget. That rising social care costs are a problem cannot be disputed, it needs addressing if you are serious about your stint in government. Tory manifesto looked a little half baked on dementia tax detail, who would lose their house for example, but ultimately the proposal of taking from inheritance to pay for care was explicit, it was a policy solution.
It is the present policy -- set up originally by the Blaiir Gov't -- that dementia patients lose their home.
I know, because it happened to my mother.
It is difficult to understand how May managed to get her name attached to Blair's half-baked policy.
You are right that is the defualt, currently happening to people. This is the bit your not appreciating, You become a Government, you don’t change the policy, you own fact it’s Blair’s dementia tax, but that you did nothing. Most voters probably not even aware which government brought it in.
We are in agreement something needs to change? That rising social care costs are a problem isn’t disputed? that the status qua really is the dementia tax? How long had they been on soap box explaining the manifesto proposal for government before the election, how fully baked was it, how well briefed party workers and spokesmen? Is it having policy’s and solutions that is bad, or in this case the business management of them.
If you think I am knocking the Tories, then yeah, knocking them for being policy lite, not dealing with everything that’s crap, and so owning that at the end of the Parliament. Their opponent to focus on isn’t Corbyn, it’s their own performance and ability to come up with and implement solutions.
Do you think its already too late to do something about Blair’s Dementia Tax in this Parliament?
0 -
Okay. Light back on. There’s a bit missing.LordOfReason said:
You say I know nothing, but i know the same as you as I am agreeing with you. Take another lookYBarddCwsc said:
You seem to know nothing.LordOfReason said:Rotten borough said: May tried tackling the demographic time bomb at last manifesto launch. It involved placing a bomb under her whole campaign”
In Conservative Manifesto, clear policy for a state-backed equity release scheme to fund social care budget. That rising social care costs are a problem cannot be disputed, it needs addressing if you are serious about your stint in government. Tory manifesto looked a little half baked on dementia tax detail, who would lose their house for example, but ultimately the proposal of taking from inheritance to pay for care was explicit, it was a policy solution.
It is the present policy -- set up originally by the Blaiir Gov't -- that dementia patients lose their home.
I know, because it happened to my mother.
It is difficult to understand how May managed to get her name attached to Blair's half-baked policy. You are right that is the defualt, currently happening to people. This is the bit your not appreciating, You become a Government, you don’t change the policy, you own fact it’s Blair’s dementia tax, but that you did nothing. Most voters probably not even aware which government brought it in.
We are in agreement something needs to change? That rising social care costs are a problem isn’t disputed? that the status qua really is the dementia tax? How long had they been on soap box explaining the manifesto proposal for government before the election, how fully baked was it, how well briefed party workers and spokesmen? Is it having policy’s and solutions that is bad, or in this case the business management of them.
If you think I am knocking the Tories, then yeah, knocking them for being policy lite, not dealing with everything that’s crap, and so owning that at the end of the Parliament. Their opponent to focus on isn’t Corbyn, it’s their own performance and ability to come up with and implement solutions.
Do you think its already too late to do something about Blair’s Dementia Tax in this Parliament?
We are in agreement the horrible status qua is dementia tax. But are you thinking May’s proposal was a Dementia tax? Because if you are, you are wrong. This is the key bit, it was improvement on status qua because technically it wasn’t a dementia tax, was a state-backed equity release scheme. Progress certainly on where we are. If that ultimately eats into inheritance is not to your liking then put even better proposal on the table, the point being to do nothing doesn’t take things forward, and ultimately doesn’t help reelection. And by that definition plays into Corbyns hands0 -
Oddly enough I'm slightly bored by the state of British politics at the moment, despite everything that's going on. Maybe I've been observing it for too long and need to do other things apart from being a news and politics obsessive.0
-
Andy JS may be bored but I am looking forward to the Tory conference, hopefully a den of intrigue among the blue rinses and UKIP defectors. Labour may have had a good conference but the Tories are masters at fighting dirty when the time comes and that just among themselves. I keep waiting for the younger Tory MPs to make a move - or am I just naive?0
-
Thanks (oh, and first second of the morning shift). Kavanaugh not to be confirmed has been backed again and the prices now are: no 8/13 and yes 6/5.Alistair said:
Republicans have made it clear they are going to steam ahead with this nomination no matter what.DecrepitJohnL said:Brett Kavanaugh's price has swung back. It is currently 8/11 not to be confirmed and even money to be confirmed. This afternoon, not confirmed was backed in from 5/6 to 1/5 and perhaps even shorter. What's changed in the last couple of hours? Or is it just that punters (and odds-compilers) have remembered that there is no popular vote, just the senate which will presumably split along party lines.
Jeff Flake had been scheduled to give a speech on the floor of the Senate and everyone anticipated a announcement that he'd be a no vote but instead it was a typical Sad Jeff Flake moment.0 -
What day is the key Brexit debate?swing_voter said:Andy JS may be bored but I am looking forward to the Tory conference, hopefully a den of intrigue among the blue rinses and UKIP defectors. Labour may have had a good conference but the Tories are masters at fighting dirty when the time comes and that just among themselves. I keep waiting for the younger Tory MPs to make a move - or am I just naive?
0 -
Now 10/11 not confirmed and 8/11 to be confirmed. I think we can see the bookie's margin with two odds-on shots there!DecrepitJohnL said:
Thanks (oh, and first second of the morning shift). Kavanaugh not to be confirmed has been backed again and the prices now are: no 8/13 and yes 6/5.Alistair said:
Republicans have made it clear they are going to steam ahead with this nomination no matter what.DecrepitJohnL said:Brett Kavanaugh's price has swung back. It is currently 8/11 not to be confirmed and even money to be confirmed. This afternoon, not confirmed was backed in from 5/6 to 1/5 and perhaps even shorter. What's changed in the last couple of hours? Or is it just that punters (and odds-compilers) have remembered that there is no popular vote, just the senate which will presumably split along party lines.
Jeff Flake had been scheduled to give a speech on the floor of the Senate and everyone anticipated a announcement that he'd be a no vote but instead it was a typical Sad Jeff Flake moment.0 -
I think that's a good suggestion. But I think pensions tax reliefs are widely agreed to be a very ineffective set of incentives, and are in need of reform. There are plenty of think tank studies out there.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a very good question. I've given some thought to it.
The first thing I would say is that I think ISAs have been extraordinarily generous. A couple who have been reasonably well-paid over the last 20 years or so can easily have built-up an ISA pot of £1m or so, and are still able to add to it at the rate of £40K a year. OK, that's out of taxed income, so not generous at the contribution stage, but being able to shelter a million quid from tax perfectly legally strikes me as unnecessarily generous. It's great encouraging savings and investment, but the principal beneficiaries of this have been the well-off. A lifetime limit would have been sensible from the taxman's point of view. However, retrofitting a lifetime limit is very awkward, because records won't always have been kept. At a minimum I'd be surprised if there isn't some limit going forward, at least for new contributions.
As for existing assets, the simplest raid would be to declare that any dividend and interest income, and any capital gains, over a certain figure are no longer tax-free. It would be administratively quite difficult though.
Whatever the mechanism, it must be a tempting target: £608bn at the end of the last tax year.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737394/Full_Statistics_Release_August_2018.pdf0 -
A high annual limit is a good thing imo as it helps the middle and working classes to catch up in later life, who in the early years will not be able to use the full (or any) allowance.rkrkrk said:
I think that's a good suggestion. But I think pensions tax reliefs are widely agreed to be a very ineffective set of incentives, and are in need of reform. There are plenty of think tank studies out there.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a very good question. I've given some thought to it.
The first thing I would say is that I think ISAs have been extraordinarily generous. A couple who have been reasonably well-paid over the last 20 years or so can easily have built-up an ISA pot of £1m or so, and are still able to add to it at the rate of £40K a year. OK, that's out of taxed income, so not generous at the contribution stage, but being able to shelter a million quid from tax perfectly legally strikes me as unnecessarily generous. It's great encouraging savings and investment, but the principal beneficiaries of this have been the well-off. A lifetime limit would have been sensible from the taxman's point of view. However, retrofitting a lifetime limit is very awkward, because records won't always have been kept. At a minimum I'd be surprised if there isn't some limit going forward, at least for new contributions.
As for existing assets, the simplest raid would be to declare that any dividend and interest income, and any capital gains, over a certain figure are no longer tax-free. It would be administratively quite difficult though.
Whatever the mechanism, it must be a tempting target: £608bn at the end of the last tax year.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737394/Full_Statistics_Release_August_2018.pdf
A lifetime limit is much fairer. However, it has the side effect of encouraging early retirement by the well-paid, which may or may not be a good thing, depending whether you want the top people's job for yourself, or their services.0 -
If the boundaries go through there is an extra Tory safe seat in her part of the world.nielh said:
I don't think this is by any means a certainty. Amber Rudd is popular, but her supporters aren't as vocal as her opponents.Benpointer said:
Not in the case of Hastings & Rye, I suspect.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Getting a bit ahead of yourself maybeFoxy said:
Yes, One of a couple of dozen Labour gains.GIN1138 said:williamglenn said:
Oh another Remainer trying to overturn the first referendum.
She'll be history at the next election anyway...0 -
Always amusing to see Tories conclude that they went wrong by not being more negative about their opponents.0
-
Must have been something you said.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Canada died tonightHYUFD said:Nadine Dorries on Peston says we need a Canada style Deal and if May does not switch to that she will have to go
0 -
Good morning, everyone.
At this stage, not remotely interested in backing anyone next time, unless silly odds are on offer.0 -
One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.0
-
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?0 -
The article makes a lot of assertions, can you prove that all or any are incorrect?GIN1138 said:rottenborough said:
Monbiot had a dig at Tuscany second home owners in his column today.
Mind you George Minbiot is totally crackers as well.
He appears to saying he wants to prevent "Climate Breakdown" (since when did "Global Warming" aka "Climate Change" become "Climate Breakdown" ?) by having a 50 year depression and making us all go back to living by candlelight in wooden shacks.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/26/economic-growth-fossil-fuels-habit-oil-industry
What a nutcase...
Or is your only argument with his use of the word 'breakdown' instead of 'change'?
It's probably not a great choice of word but I suspect that victims of hurricane 'Florence' or super typhoon 'Mangkhut' might even agree with him.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/typhoon-mangkhut-storm-larger-than-florence-to-hit-southeast-asia-2018-9
Come on let's see whether you are 'crackers' or a 'nutcase'.0 -
This is not even close to being a showstopper. The plan out forward on Monday is obviously a basis for negotiation with the EU so of course not all items are fully worked out in relation to the NI border although the basics of an arrangement are clear. The DUP are clear that they don't want different regulations in NI - in reality, they will probably accept a bit of flexibility in return for some more cash as long as the border is at the actual border and not in the Irish Sea.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And that is why TM rejects Canadawilliamglenn said:Also the DUP have rubbished the Plan B supported by the Rees-Mogg faction.
The DUP have completely rejected the NI backstop but they agree in principle to a maxfac NI border and have just confirmed this. They are against EEA/CU and always have been. This is just a bit of pushback to remind people that they are not going to countenance major regulatory changes in NI.0 -
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.0 -
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
0 -
It's a surprising and interesting graph, not least because of its relative stability and clear directions of travel. It doesn't seem to be reacting to every event whether Brexit mess or anti-Semitic utterance.
It seems to me that there are 2 conflicting trends. Firstly, the general rule is that governments lose seats. Even in 1992 Major lost seats despite holding onto a majority. Given May has already lost hers how do the Tories hang on again? Secondly, oppositions who are not ahead by this stage in a Parliament rarely prosper. Labour are struggling to hold equality against a government one step away from chaos.
The result is that at the next election they should both lose for different reasons but lose to who? The Lib Dems are nowhere and still led by a zombie, UKIP is moribund, the SNP have clearly peaked, who is the winner out of this shower of losers?
If the Tories deliver a Brexit deal which is far from ideal but with which the majority can live they will have an opportunity to show that they deserve to lead this country. But it is only an opportunity and it remains to be seen what they propose to do with it. That is what I will be looking for in this coming week. Is this a party obsessed or exhausted by Brexit and out of ideas or does it have proposals that will start to address our many pressing concerns after the interlude of the last 2 years?0 -
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.0 -
The man needs a psychiatrist.williamglenn said:0 -
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.0 -
... because he would welcome the UK back?Roger said:
The man needs a psychiatrist.williamglenn said:
Seems totally sane to me.0 -
Churchill memorably said in the 1945 campaign an Attlee government would bring in a British Gestapo.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
https://oedeboyz.com/2015/07/10/winston-churchills-gestapo-speech-4th-june-1945-2/
Which also includes Attlees response, well worth reading too as it has aged well.
0 -
This is very different.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
And I think you know it is too.0 -
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.0 -
Watching Corbyn Abbott and McDonnell walking together yesterday it was close to impossible imagining them winning an election....
....But then you think Tory and they seem even less likely.
0 -
Even May cannot bring herself to say out loud that her administration’s only policy, ie Brexit, will make the country better off or that she personally would vote for it.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
You cannot blame the voters if they turn to a magic money tree.0 -
It's the way you tell 'emCasino_Royale said:
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.0 -
ROFLMAOCasino_Royale said:
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.
prudent = George Osborne at Hinckley??
sensible = Boris Johnson??
moderate = Jacob Rees-Mogg and his ERG gang??
effective = Theresa May or Chris Grayling??
You are blind my friend, blind. Labour has changed for certain. The Conservatives have changed just as much.0 -
So now show us the correlation with hurricanes and claimate change? The media reporting of events and the number of events themselves are not the same thing.logical_song said:
The article makes a lot of assertions, can you prove that all or any are incorrect?GIN1138 said:rottenborough said:
Monbiot had a dig at Tuscany second home owners in his column today.
Mind you George Minbiot is totally crackers as well.
He appears to saying he wants to prevent "Climate Breakdown" (since when did "Global Warming" aka "Climate Change" become "Climate Breakdown" ?) by having a 50 year depression and making us all go back to living by candlelight in wooden shacks.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/26/economic-growth-fossil-fuels-habit-oil-industry
What a nutcase...
Or is your only argument with his use of the word 'breakdown' instead of 'change'?
It's probably not a great choice of word but I suspect that victims of hurricane 'Florence' or super typhoon 'Mangkhut' might even agree with him.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/typhoon-mangkhut-storm-larger-than-florence-to-hit-southeast-asia-2018-9
Come on let's see whether you are 'crackers' or a 'nutcase'.0 -
There are ideological elements in both parties driving them away from their historic purpose.Casino_Royale said:
This is very different.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
And I think you know it is too.0 -
Indeed. Possibly the most ludicrous post of the year.Jonathan said:
ROFLMAOCasino_Royale said:
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.
prudent = George Osborne at Hinckley??
sensible = Boris Johnson??
moderate = Jacob Rees-Mogg and his ERG gang??
effective = Theresa May or Chris Grayling??
You are blind my friend, blind. Labour has changed for certain. The Conservatives have changed just as much.0 -
Tories say it every time. Remember the Demon Eyes posters for Blair?Casino_Royale said:
This is very different.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
And I think you know it is too.
McDonnells policies polled quite well on Yougov daily the other day, even 20% of Tory supporters favoured redistriubution of shares.0 -
Foxy said:
Copeland in second place, and Blaby in Leics in 4th. Colour me a bit sceptical too!AndyJS said:"“If you can show me one person in Aldershot who’s happy, I’ll give you a free haircut,” promised Giovanni Gomma, a barber, in the centre of the Hampshire district that has been declared the happiest in the UK.
Gomma, 61, who has run his Gomma’s Haircare salon on Station Road for 45 years, said the Office of National Statistics (ONS) – which revealed its findings on Wednesday – must have got its calculations wrong “or maybe the whole country isn’t very happy”."
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/26/people-here-want-to-be-lifted-hampshire-town-is-happiest-uk-place
Blaby is quite a pleasant but dull suburb of Leicester, but 4th happiest place in the country? If so, then I pity the rest!
I spend too much of my time in Copeland... it doesn’t seem exceptionally happy, but Whitehaven is very beautiful when the sun shines over the harbour and you can just make out the Isle of Man. But it’s also one of the most obese areas of the uk. Maybe the people who had answered the survey had just eaten a tremendously good pie.0 -
Not at all. A gallant gesture from Macron. A towering figure compared to the ideologues, clowns and uncloseted xenophobes we have to endure on this side of the Channel.Roger said:
The man needs a psychiatrist.williamglenn said:
0 -
Oh thaaat niiiiiice Mr cooooorrrrrrbbbybnDecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?0 -
We have Labour politicians advocating mass nationalisations, general strikes, capital controls, control of the press and flirting with enemies of the people type rhetoric and racism.Foxy said:
Tories say it every time. Remember the Demon Eyes posters for Blair?Casino_Royale said:
This is very different.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
And I think you know it is too.
McDonnells policies polled quite well on Yougov daily the other day, even 20% of Tory supporters favoured redistriubution of shares.
It’s absolute madness. And it seems to have infected you too, because of Jeremy Hunt.. or something.0 -
This government is pissing in our faces and you're claiming it's raining.Casino_Royale said:
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.0 -
We as a nation have shown our true colours. It's not a pretty sight.logical_song said:
... because he would welcome the UK back?Roger said:
The man needs a psychiatrist.williamglenn said:
Seems totally sane to me.0 -
I am yet again amazed that people on this site think that we are in difficult economic times and the governement is completely incompetent and at fault for it. As i keep saying over and over this country is at full employment which is a remarkable achievement. If someone wants a job now they can have one. Name a time in the last 50 years when that has happened.Roger said:
It's the way you tell 'emCasino_Royale said:
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives you believe but let's assume they are both right.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So we have the Conservatives who are irredeemably split, whose flagship policy will cost hundreds of billions of pounds and perhaps break up the United Kingdom, and who have already made massive cuts to police and the armed forces, and who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.0 -
In what way is taking control of peoples savings for 20-30 years, managing them “for the benefit of the state” and possibly giving them back at the end not “expropriation”?Benpointer said:
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.Charles said:
I suspect you are conflating two thingstyson said:
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...Mortimer said:
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....AlastairMeeks said:
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.ydoethur said:
They lose all their money.GIN1138 said:How does renationalization work then?
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
0 -
They have ideas if you are stark raving mad and believe they will do any of it without wrecking the country. Unfortunately we have so many thick people who will believe their mumbo jumbo that they are likely to get in.GIN1138 said:
Polly's got one foot in Jezza's camp for now...rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.0 -
I see the lights will literally go out in NI if there is a No Deal BREXIT0
-
That’s the confusion. The speculation is that Labour would take over private (ie non company) pension plans to investBenpointer said:
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.Mortimer said:
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.Benpointer said:
How so?!Mortimer said:
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.Benpointer said:
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.Charles said:
I suspect you are conflating two thingstyson said:
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...Mortimer said:
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....AlastairMeeks said:
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.ydoethur said:
They lose all their money.GIN1138 said:How does renationalization work then?
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
It would be theft.0 -
Hey BJO - what did you think of Corbyn's speech yesterday?bigjohnowls said:I see the lights will literally go out in NI if there is a No Deal BREXIT
Thought there were some really exciting ideas in there. Contrast to the Tories where it's the same old austerity for the masses while the rich get richer.0 -
Thanks to the SNP propping up a Jezza administration in all likelihood.malcolmg said:
They have ideas if you are stark raving mad and believe they will do any of it without wrecking the country. Unfortunately we have so many thick people who will believe their mumbo jumbo that they are likely to get in.GIN1138 said:
Polly's got one foot in Jezza's camp for now...rottenborough said:Poly Tonybee on Newsnight, "Labour have looked the party with ideas" this week.
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.0 -
No, I have never been very critical of Hunt.Casino_Royale said:
We have Labour politicians advocating mass nationalisations, general strikes, capital controls, control of the press and flirting with enemies of the people type rhetoric and racism.Foxy said:
Tories say it every time. Remember the Demon Eyes posters for Blair?Casino_Royale said:
This is very different.Jonathan said:
Tories say the same thing about every Labour administration and vice versa.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
And I think you know it is too.
McDonnells policies polled quite well on Yougov daily the other day, even 20% of Tory supporters favoured redistriubution of shares.
It’s absolute madness. And it seems to have infected you too, because of Jeremy Hunt.. or something.
We have heard it all before from Tories, they always fall back on these scare stories.
I will be voting LD or Green next election, but would prefer Corbyn to May as PM.0 -
But but butcurrystar said:
I am yet again amazed that people on this site think that we are in difficult economic times and the governement is completely incompetent and at fault for it. As i keep saying over and over this country is at full employment which is a remarkable achievement. If someone wants a job now they can have one. Name a time in the last 50 years when that has happened.Roger said:
It's the way you tell 'emCasino_Royale said:
It’s false what-aboutism.Jonathan said:
* "Fuck business" compromised their pro business credentialsIanB2 said:
Exactly. With the reckless gamble that is Brexit the Tories forfeit both their reputation for safe stewardship of the economy and their ability to call out other parties for their supposedly risky plans.OldKingCole said:
Like. The more May goes on about how she’s working in the 'National Interest’ on Brexit the less I believe her.DecrepitJohnL said:
The Conservative policy on Brexit will cost hundreds of billions of pounds. And so will its reversal. Obviously that depends on which Conservatives youand who have been unable to prevent Russian assassins poisoning half the countryside, and whose reaction to that is less than the Americans have done.Casino_Royale said:One thing’s for sure; there’s nothing that isn’t very very scary about a Corbyn/McDonnell led administration.
So for the voter on the Clapham omnibus, in comparison with the above, what is so scary about that nice Mr Corbyn?
While I felt Corbyn had found the Magic Money Tree yesterday, he sounded a lot more sincere than she does, and, of course, there’s always the threat of Boris and/or JRM coming to the top of the Tory party. TBH, much more scary.
* For obvious reasons, the Tories have lost their reputation for managerial competence.
* Brexit, which if nothing else is an ideological enterprise, has lost the Tories their reputation for quiet pragmatism.
* And a really positive thing, Cameron killed social conservatism.
Not sure what's left of the old Tory party. It's now a right-wing mirror of the old Labour party. Certainly not conservative any more.
Aside from Brexit, which is just a resetting of a trading relationship for political reasons, this Government is fiscally prudent, sensible, moderate and effective.
[insert favourite buzzwords]
Zero hours,
Food banks
Period poverty
Etc etc etc is the momentum response. The fact is the country is in pretty good shape. The risk is the longer term decisions that we need made by the government are not getting made as so much of its effort is taken up by Brexit.0 -
Maybe not such a bad thing, shake them out of the 17th century.bigjohnowls said:I see the lights will literally go out in NI if there is a No Deal BREXIT
0
