Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Looking back over 2018: Alastair Meeks reviews his predictions

124»

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 51,282
    Charles said:

    Chocolate is toxic for dogs
    My dogs have often eaten chocolate (usually by larceny), and were rather fond of it. No visible harm, indeed they looked rather chipper, albeit rather sheepish after scoffing it.

    I think that even a small dog needs to eat about a pound of chocolate for it to be fatal.
  • SeanT said:

    One thing for sure, Mr Meeks is right about entrenched positions.

    Had Christmas dinner with my daughter's family in Kent: mainly Leavers, some Remainers, sort-of middle class, not rich by any means.

    I was not surprised by the age divide - the younger were more Remainery. What surprised me was that the Leavers accepted that Brexit had been botched, and that Crash Brexit could be calamitous, but had they changed their minds? Not a jot. There was a wistfulness about the ending of Free Movement, but in the end the crunch argument was: we don't want to be ruled by people we cannot elect or eject.

    And they live in a part of Kent which may be hardest hit by Crash Brexit chaos.

    I suspect a 2nd referendum would be very very close, and might easily - probably? - produce another very narrow Leave win.

    Which would be the worst of all worlds, for everyone.

    As a country we are fucked by Article 50, written by our very own Lord Kerr for the EU Constitution. My present opinion is that we should therefore burn down Lord Kerr's house and set fire to his pets. For starters.

    That's bang out of order. His family are fair game, but his dog? That's just barbaric!
  • matt said:

    FWIW, the high street of my childhood was a combination of shoe shops, building societies and estate agents. When did high streets thrive, as it wasn’t then. People thought Ronald Reagan was planning to have the USSR nuke Bielefeld (remember Able Archer), genuinely stupid people weren’t going to university, Concorde was only used by Joan Collins and people were perhaps a little divided on the merits of the Thatcher government.

    You forgot to mention that the Top 40 had good songs. That’s traditional but, fwiw, most were absolutely shite.

    Nostalgia’s a terrible thing.
    High Streets thrived in the Happy Families card game and Dads Army.

    Except on Sundays and early closing afternoons.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    matt said:

    I forgot to mention the space shuttle. Reusable for values of reusable, Challenger led to the bad taste joke of my childhood, “Why do astronauts drink Pepsi? Because they can’t get 7-Up.” Still, I suppose they could have been working at Chernobyl.
    What does NASA stand for? Need another seven astronauts

    How do we know astronauts have dandruff? They left their head and shoulders on the beach

    And (my favourite)

    what were Christa McAuliffe’s last words? What does this button do?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,399

    Interesting list. Most of these are really down to the iPhone, which was truly revolutionary. There are 5 or 6 on there I have never heard of (Lyft, Waze, Slack, Square, Venmo, Hulu), which probably says more about me than the list.

    I was thinking whether there was a corresponding list of things we don't have anymore. A quick thought threw up:

    Concorde*
    Space Shuttle
    Free University tuition (ok that was >20 years ago)
    Thriving High Streets
    A sane POTUS
    A Government actually governing

    ... I bet there are others.

    (*Yes ok, 15 years and 2 months ago)
    The iPhone was *not* revolutionary. Nor was the iPad. Both built long-standing concepts on existing technologies and packaged them exquisitely. And congrats to them on that; but the 'revolutionary' tag was created by Apple, and fed by journos who received free goodies and handsets (yes, really).

    All the technologies that made the iPhone existed; and all had been used in other devices. I believe even the capacative touchscreen had been used in a smartphone (IIRC a couple of LG / Samsung ones) What they did was a brilliant unification of these technologies. And it was brilliant.

    Interestingly enough, Apple are doing more genuine innovation now, when they're starting to suffer a little.

    As an aside, at company X we were looking to sell our operating system into other markets, as a tiny, functional embedded OS on ARM processors. Management said no, as it was co-operative multitasking, and everyone wanted the better pre-emptive multi-tasking. Imagine my amusement when, a few years later, the iPhone was released with a single-tasking iOS, and Android with a basic bare-shell OS. A little investment and some marketing, and we could have been ruling the world ... ;)
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,485
    An extraordinary trading session on Wall Street with the DJIA up over 1000 points (just under 5%) on the session). Oil jumped 10% with WTI back to $46.95 and Brent Crude to $55.53.

    Dead cat bounce or were last week and Monday's falls overdone?

    I wonder if the FTSE will gain 10% in the last three trading sessions and close the year at 7200.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302
    matt said:

    People thought Bush the 2nd was the reincarnation of Washington....

    Boeing was close to green lighting the Sonic Cruiser in 2001 the WTC, that would have been the new Concorde. The space shuttle was a hangover from the Cold War.

    If there’s a real point, it’s an atrophying of ambition. Just as the media measures distances in London buses so, in this country anything ambitious and involving Goverment spending is measured in terms of how the money could be spent on the NHS. Better speak to the 24 hour media.
    Medicine and medical care have definitely improved in the past 15 years, offset to a degree by increasingly unhealthy lifestyles.

    Is the pace of change of technology continuing to accelerate or have we passed a peak?

    Hard to compare one new technology with another but there were a staggering number of technological advances in the 60 years from 1900 to 1960. I am not convinced there will have been as many in 60 years from 1960.

    The internet, mobile computing devices and DNA analysis are three of the biggest in the latter period. The 1900-1960 period has powered-flight, space flight, radio, television, cinema, antibiotics, nuclear power, transplants, digital computing...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,352
    edited December 2018


    Now perhaps we can summarise the situation:

    1) There was a Budget in March 1981

    2) Some economists wrote a letter saying it would deepen the recession

    3) The recession did not deepen instead it ended

    The exchange you barged in upon was about economists predicting a recession, not predicting a deepening of an existing recession. Toddle off and bury yourself in some supermarket food pricing, old sport.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Medicine and medical care have definitely improved in the past 15 years, offset to a degree by increasingly unhealthy lifestyles.

    Is the pace of change of technology continuing to accelerate or have we passed a peak?

    Hard to compare one new technology with another but there were a staggering number of technological advances in the 60 years from 1900 to 1960. I am not convinced there will have been as many in 60 years from 1960.

    The internet, mobile computing devices and DNA analysis are three of the biggest in the latter period. The 1900-1960 period has powered-flight, space flight, radio, television, cinema, antibiotics, nuclear power, transplants, digital computing...
    Immunology will be absolutely transformational. From a sheer invention perspective it is better than antibiotics (which was serendipity, sharp observation and good chemistry but not great science). Immunology - especially IO - is truly ground breaking
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302

    The iPhone was *not* revolutionary. Nor was the iPad. Both built long-standing concepts on existing technologies and packaged them exquisitely. And congrats to them on that; but the 'revolutionary' tag was created by Apple, and fed by journos who received free goodies and handsets (yes, really).

    All the technologies that made the iPhone existed; and all had been used in other devices. I believe even the capacative touchscreen had been used in a smartphone (IIRC a couple of LG / Samsung ones) What they did was a brilliant unification of these technologies. And it was brilliant.

    Interestingly enough, Apple are doing more genuine innovation now, when they're starting to suffer a little.

    As an aside, at company X we were looking to sell our operating system into other markets, as a tiny, functional embedded OS on ARM processors. Management said no, as it was co-operative multitasking, and everyone wanted the better pre-emptive multi-tasking. Imagine my amusement when, a few years later, the iPhone was released with a single-tasking iOS, and Android with a basic bare-shell OS. A little investment and some marketing, and we could have been ruling the world ... ;)
    Ah bad luck on missing out on that. It would be quite interesting to collate a book on heroic 'near misses' - I bet there are a lot out there.

    I would contend that what Apple did with the iPhone was revolutionary, not because of the underlying technologies but in the way they were packaged together to meet a need people didn't know they had.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302
    Charles said:

    Immunology will be absolutely transformational. From a sheer invention perspective it is better than antibiotics (which was serendipity, sharp observation and good chemistry but not great science). Immunology - especially IO - is truly ground breaking
    Interesting. I confess I had to google Immunology IO. Found this paper which I found helpful:

    https://cdn.reachmd.com/uploads/pdf_files/i-o_fact_sheet.pdf

    I wasn't of course trying to say we won't continue to make technological advances, I just wonder if the pace will be as great in the future. AI may be a key that unlocks an even quicker pace of course.

    In the 1900 -1960 two global wars aggressively drove technology - it's probably the only upside of war.
  • The exchange you barged in upon was about economists predicting a recession, not predicting a deepening of an existing recession. Toddle off and bury yourself in some supermarket food pricing, old sport.

    Is that really the best you can come up with ???

    The economists were wrong - end of story.

    You lose.
  • Is that really the best you can come up with ???

    The economists were wrong - end of story.

    You lose.
    'You lose.'

    Well, at least not far to go to see the best you can come up with.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,845

    It wasn't much of a triumph. 0.25% of GDP at the most generous conceivable evaluation? In fact the UK had a lot of leverage in the EU and could and did use it to pick up much juicier plums than a bit of a discount on the membership fee. I am quite sure that whoever got the EMA located in London did a sight more for GDP than whoever came up with the handbag PR stunt. If you think the rebate is anything to write home about you are poorly informed about where the UK's true interests lie.
    Your views on this subject are akin to a mania.
  • Medicine and medical care have definitely improved in the past 15 years, offset to a degree by increasingly unhealthy lifestyles.

    Is the pace of change of technology continuing to accelerate or have we passed a peak?

    Hard to compare one new technology with another but there were a staggering number of technological advances in the 60 years from 1900 to 1960. I am not convinced there will have been as many in 60 years from 1960.

    The internet, mobile computing devices and DNA analysis are three of the biggest in the latter period. The 1900-1960 period has powered-flight, space flight, radio, television, cinema, antibiotics, nuclear power, transplants, digital computing...
    It was less than 66 years from the Wright Brothers to Neil Armstrong.

    I wonder if anyone saw both.

    I've read that the year with the biggest technological breakthroughs was in the 19th century - but I don't remember which year it was.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,121
    Sean_F said:

    Lots of people find fox hunting disgusting, but that makes no difference to hunters, because they consider their behaviour morally correct.

    And...your point is?

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302

    It was less than 66 years from the Wright Brothers to Neil Armstrong.

    I wonder if anyone saw both.

    I've read that the year with the biggest technological breakthroughs was in the 19th century - but I don't remember which year it was.
    I'd be surprised, but interested to know what the year and the breakthroughs might have been.

    It's hard to pin most technological breakthroughs down to just one year.
  • 'You lose.'

    Well, at least not far to go to see the best you can come up with.
    As the conversation seems to be increasingly opaque perhaps we should leave it agreement that the economists were wrong.

    Rest assured though I will keep you informed of future bargains in the supermarket veg aisle.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302

    As the conversation seems to be increasingly opaque perhaps we should leave it agreement that the economists were wrong.

    Rest assured though I will keep you informed of future bargains in the supermarket veg aisle.
    Your April 'empty shelves' reports after No Deal will be a great comfort in our hour of darkness. :wink:
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Your April 'empty shelves' reports after No Deal will be a great comfort in our hour of darkness. :wink:
    Somebody mentioned yesterday a piece of second hand gossip ... about half of the civil servants in the Brexit department are stock piling food...
  • Interesting list. Most of these are really down to the iPhone, which was truly revolutionary. There are 5 or 6 on there I have never heard of (Lyft, Waze, Slack, Square, Venmo, Hulu), which probably says more about me than the list.

    I was thinking whether there was a corresponding list of things we don't have anymore. A quick thought threw up:

    Concorde*
    Space Shuttle
    Free University tuition (ok that was >20 years ago)
    Thriving High Streets
    A sane POTUS
    A Government actually governing

    ... I bet there are others.

    (*Yes ok, 15 years and 2 months ago)
    I had just graduated university 15 years ago and paid tuition fees the entire time.

    15 years ago we were in the Iraq War and I'm not sure many of the people at the time would use the phrase sane as the first adjective to use about POTUS Dubya.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302
    edited December 2018
    Charles said:

    Somebody mentioned yesterday a piece of second hand gossip ... about half of the civil servants in the Brexit department are stock piling food...
    I suspect even with a No Deal crash-out Brexit there would be no need to stockpile food...
    ...if it weren't for other people stockpiling food.

    If No Deal looks likely as we get to the end of February, I'd expect severe shortages in March - before Brexit.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    Charles said:

    Somebody mentioned yesterday a piece of second hand gossip ... about half of the civil servants in the Brexit department are stock piling food...
    If they haven't ruined their own economy by then, maybe the Americans will consider sending "care packages" as they did immediatey after WWII.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302

    I had just graduated university 15 years ago and paid tuition fees the entire time.

    15 years ago we were in the Iraq War and I'm not sure many of the people at the time would use the phrase sane as the first adjective to use about POTUS Dubya.
    I confess, I choked a bit on the POTUS point :smile:

    I notice you didn't quibble with the "A Government actually governing" point though.
  • I'd be surprised, but interested to know what the year and the breakthroughs might have been.

    It's hard to pin most technological breakthroughs down to just one year.
    There's certainly a very subjective aspect as to how important technological and scientific breakthrough were and to when they were actually made.

    But with the likes of telephones, electrical usage and the internal combustion engine all being developed in the late 19th century there may have been a year when 'everything happened'.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302
    Toms said:

    If they haven't ruined their own economy by then, maybe the Americans will consider sending "care packages" as they did immediatey after WWII.
    Under President Trump? Not a chance.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,399

    Ah bad luck on missing out on that. It would be quite interesting to collate a book on heroic 'near misses' - I bet there are a lot out there.

    I would contend that what Apple did with the iPhone was revolutionary, not because of the underlying technologies but in the way they were packaged together to meet a need people didn't know they had.
    Company X created the ARM processor, so it had at least one direct hit. ;)

    It also had many, many near misses. And all can be put, in part, down to management decisions.
  • I confess, I choked a bit on the POTUS point :smile:

    I notice you didn't quibble with the "A Government actually governing" point though.
    Well it took a certain amount of governing to get our troops into Iraq.

    Whether that is some governing that should have happened I'll leave to you.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,302

    Well it took a certain amount of governing to get our troops into Iraq.

    Whether that is some governing that should have happened I'll leave to you.
    I am not sure it was that difficult since the Conservative opposition supported it.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,317
    Things that have changed since 2004?

    Social acceptance of large tattoos
    Increased legalisation of marijuana
    MCU superhero movies.
    Extremely convincing computer generated imagery.
    Widespread use of big data software.
    I think we've now violated Moore's Law, although some say 3D architecture will reenable it.
    Growth in isolationism and the possible destruction of the West as a concept.
    Resurgence in Russian military ability, to the point where I don't think we can take them.
    Growth in antibiotic resistant bacteria and related infections.
    Growth in commercially viable electric cars.
    Growth in identity politics.
    Decrease in class identity, especially as a predictor of voting.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 24,317
    Possibly also the increased use of colour correction in films (which bugs me no end)
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    The recession which had already happened before the 1981 Budget and the letter of the 364 economists ?
    The recession that happened as a result of the tight fiscal policies of the government, and which they were shortly to reverse. The economists would’ve been correct in their prediction if the government did not change this policy.

    Your views on this subject are akin to a mania.
    No they are not. They are a considered evaluation of the evidence.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Is that really the best you can come up with ???

    The economists were wrong - end of story.

    You lose.
    The economists weren't wrong. They pointed out the consequences of the extreme reduction of demand in the economy. This was obviously what was going on and the effects in the real world were very apparent at the time. The policy had to be reversed and was reversed. It is a clear cut example of incompetent economic management and left a clear set of fingerprints in the economic data of the time.

    Who lost is obvious. The country.

  • The economists weren't wrong. They pointed out the consequences of the extreme reduction of demand in the economy. This was obviously what was going on and the effects in the real world were very apparent at the time. The policy had to be reversed and was reversed. It is a clear cut example of incompetent economic management and left a clear set of fingerprints in the economic data of the time.

    Who lost is obvious. The country.

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why there was a global recession at that time if it was all the consequence of UK economic policy ?

    And yes the economists were wrong - the recession didn't deepen it ended.

    Clearly you are bitter about that.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Perhaps you'd like to explain why there was a global recession at that time if it was all the consequence of UK economic policy ?

    And yes the economists were wrong - the recession didn't deepen it ended.

    Clearly you are bitter about that.
    Britain did worst than comparable countries.
  • Britain did worst than comparable countries.
    Did it ?

    I rather doubt you've bothered to look up the actual data.

    Yet it was the UK which re-elected its government whereas those in the USA, France, Germany, Spain, Australia and other countries lost power.

    Still you seem to have accepted that the 1981 Budget did not deepen the recession and that the economists were wrong.
  • The statistics from the Thatcher era tell a very different story from the fantasy peddled by partisan myth-makers. The reality is that she blew the North Sea Oil windfall on mass unemployment and tax cuts.
    The unemployment was part of the restructuring of the economy. It is you and the lunatic socialists who peddle the myths.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    The unemployment was part of the restructuring of the economy. It is you and the lunatic socialists who peddle the myths.
    There was a plan to restructure the economy? That involved creating mass unemployment? Really? Then should we not have heard about it before the event rather than afterwards?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    Did it ?

    I rather doubt you've bothered to look up the actual data.

    Yet it was the UK which re-elected its government whereas those in the USA, France, Germany, Spain, Australia and other countries lost power.

    Still you seem to have accepted that the 1981 Budget did not deepen the recession and that the economists were wrong.
    In what way were the economists wrong? The point they were making was that reducing aggregate demand in the economy would reduce output and lead to businesses failing and jobs being lost. That was already in process when they made their warning. The 1981 budget was part of the fiscal tightening. The policy changed shortly afterwards. That the whole disaster has still not been admitted as a mistake by partisans for the Conservative party is rather pitiful.
  • In what way were the economists wrong? The point they were making was that reducing aggregate demand in the economy would reduce output and lead to businesses failing and jobs being lost. That was already in process when they made their warning. The 1981 budget was part of the fiscal tightening. The policy changed shortly afterwards. That the whole disaster has still not been admitted as a mistake by partisans for the Conservative party is rather pitiful.
    Here is the economic data:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/ihyq/qna

    The recession ended with the 1981 Budget, it did not deepen.

    The economists were wrong.

    That you are unable to look at actual economic data but prefer to wallow in your ignorant bigotry is utterly pitiful.
This discussion has been closed.