politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It took 330 days before TMay’s “best PM” rating dropped below

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

FF43 said:

On US trade deals.

John Howard then PM of Australia controversially brought his country into the Iraq war on the idea that Australia should stay close to America and this would unlock all sorts of trade deals. Howard then called in the favour and after some foot dragging on the part of the Americans got his FTA The Australia Productivity Commission subsequently reviewed the deal and determined it brought no net advantage to Australia, which did far better with another multilateral deal.

Why should we expect any FTA with the US not to leave us actually worse off? The president now dislikes any arrangement that doesn't give the US an egregious advantage, unlike Bush he doesn't owe us any favours. And our government seems DESPERATE to sign.

Meanwhile in the real world Australia has since then grown from strength to strength, while the UK has flatlined in Europe.

But yeah any time I say this its all natural resources, Australia has nothing else apparently.

Where is this magical growth going to come from after Brexit?

We could liberalise our regulations like Singapore.
We could sign trade deals with the rest of the world like America.

For starters.

Why will signing a FTA with America make any difference to our growth? American companies already trade with Britain. It isn’t a vast new market.

Why does have an FTA with Europe make any difference to our growth? Non-EU companies already trade with Europe.

Pot/kettle nonsense that.

The EU is much more than a FTA agreement.

Which is why we voted to Leave.

No. We voted to leave for all sorts of ridiculous reasons; most having nothing to do with the EU at all. It is you that is projecting.

Do you think your libertarian ideology has majority support in this country? Honestly?

No. But I think it is a not insignificant ideology within the Conservative Party, which is why I support it.

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Taxman said:

Personally, I could not care less who comes into the country as long as they are not criminals that will attack, steal or defraud people. However, I helped an old lady today who voted for Brexit and she said that she was aware that the economy might not perform as well "but at least the immigrants will go home". I told her she was wrong on this and instead of European immigrants, more would come from elsewhere in the world. She changed the subject....

I'm glad she's wrong, aren't you? I'm also glad Boris has dropped the tens of thousands pledge and liberalised migration we need.

It doesn't mean that our old system wasn't a mess. I can see no reason to justify turning away the best and brightest while allowing uncapped low skilled migration. Can you justify it?

No, because all high earning diehard Remainers do is yell 'racist' at anyone who suggests an immigration system based on skills needed rather than an open door

It is the young who have to compete for these jobs and it is the young who voted overwhelmingly for Remain.

46% of C2s aged 18-34 voted Leave as did 44% of 18-34 DEs, 65% of 35 to 54 C2s and 64% of 35 to 54 DEs voted Leave, it was only middle class young voters who voted overwhelmingly Remain, working class young voters split almost evenly and working class middle aged voters voted strongly for Leave


https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum

Those statistics prove my point. A majority of 18-34 year olds in every social class voted to remain.

No they do not at all, 46% of C2s aged 18 to 34 voted Leave and 44% of 18 to 34 DEs voted Leave compared to 71% of 18 to 34 ABC1 voters who voted Remain precisely because they wanted fewer low skilled and medium skilled EU immigrants which is precisely want Boris is delivering with his points system so migration is based on need not an open door

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Taxman said:

Personally, I could not care less who comes into the country as long as they are not criminals that will attack, steal or defraud people. However, I helped an old lady today who voted for Brexit and she said that she was aware that the economy might not perform as well "but at least the immigrants will go home". I told her she was wrong on this and instead of European immigrants, more would come from elsewhere in the world. She changed the subject....

I'm glad she's wrong, aren't you? I'm also glad Boris has dropped the tens of thousands pledge and liberalised migration we need.

It doesn't mean that our old system wasn't a mess. I can see no reason to justify turning away the best and brightest while allowing uncapped low skilled migration. Can you justify it?

No, because all high earning diehard Remainers do is yell 'racist' at anyone who suggests an immigration system based on skills needed rather than an open door

It is the young who have to compete for these jobs and it is the young who voted overwhelmingly for Remain.

46% of C2s aged 18-34 voted Leave as did 44% of 18-34 DEs, 65% of 35 to 54 C2s and 64% of 35 to 54 DEs voted Leave, it was only middle class young voters who voted overwhelmingly Remain, working class young voters split almost evenly and working class middle aged voters voted strongly for Leave


https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum

Those statistics prove my point. A majority of 18-34 year olds in every social class voted to remain.

No they do not at all, 46% of C2s aged 18 to 34 voted Leave and 44% of 18 to 34 DEs voted Leave compared to 71% of 18 to 34 ABC1 voters who voted Remain precisely because they wanted fewer low skilled and medium skilled EU immigrants which is precisely want Boris is delivering with his points system so migration is based on need not an open door

Tell me what is wrong about this statement:

“A majority of 18-34 year olds in every social class voted to remain”

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

The_Taxman said:

Personally, I could not care less who comes into the country as long as they are not criminals that will attack, steal or defraud people. However, I helped an old lady today who voted for Brexit and she said that she was aware that the economy might not perform as well "but at least the immigrants will go home". I told her she was wrong on this and instead of European immigrants, more would come from elsewhere in the world. She changed the subject....

I'm glad she's wrong, aren't you? I'm also glad Boris has dropped the tens of thousands pledge and liberalised migration we need.

It doesn't mean that our old system wasn't a mess. I can see no reason to justify turning away the best and brightest while allowing uncapped low skilled migration. Can you justify it?

No, because all high earning diehard Remainers do is yell 'racist' at anyone who suggests an immigration system based on skills needed rather than an open door

It is the young who have to compete for these jobs and it is the young who voted overwhelmingly for Remain.

46% of C2s aged 18-34 voted Leave as did 44% of 18-34 DEs, 65% of 35 to 54 C2s and 64% of 35 to 54 DEs voted Leave, it was only middle class young voters who voted overwhelmingly Remain, working class young voters split almost evenly and working class middle aged voters voted strongly for Leave


https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum

Those statistics prove my point. A majority of 18-34 year olds in every social class voted to remain.

No they do not at all, 46% of C2s aged 18 to 34 voted Leave and 44% of 18 to 34 DEs voted Leave compared to 71% of 18 to 34 ABC1 voters who voted Remain precisely because they wanted fewer low skilled and medium skilled EU immigrants which is precisely want Boris is delivering with his points system so migration is based on need not an open door

Tell me what is wrong about this statement:

“A majority of 18-34 year olds in every social class voted to remain”

17% more C2 voters aged 18 to 34 voted Leave than ABC1 18 to 34 voters largely because of immigration

How about an example

Gallowgate said:

Currystardog said:

Gallowgate said:

Currystardog said:

Just watched Vince Cable on Newsnight, my god he talked nonsense

Pot kettle

Go on then tell me what nonsense I talk

Quite literally everything.

How about an example?

Lib Dems hold the ward in Cambridge with a much increased majority. Good portent for Lib Dem gains in the next Westminster election.

Philip_Thompson said:

dixiedean said:

Drutt said:

On topic, is it the PM/LOTO 'best PM' margin or the raw approval numbers that are the best indication of electoral success? C'mon, someone on here must keep a spreadsheet.

On the Boris-headhunting-overseas scientists point, it's always seemed self-evident to me that a mature economy should treat immigration the same way a business should treat recruitment. Establish the nature, size and shape of the shortfall you have, seek applications, select from applicants.

Assuming (and this may be a bit of a reach) that the electorate agrees broadly with the Gov view of 'recruitment' need, nobody resents the new kid as a freeloader, easing community harmony to boot.

Indeed so. What evidence do we have that this will be done fairly, efficiently and competently? Besides, I was labouring under the misapprehension that the Tories believed the market, not the Nationalised Immigration Board, to be the best allocator of resources.

I do believe in the market. I think there is a market-based way to solve this.

Set an income based threshold, perhaps say top 40 percentile of UK wages, and if a prospective migrant is getting a job with a salary over that threshold let them in. If they're not then don't.

It's just a starting point suggestion but is a market-based one. If there is high wages for the job then that would imply there is high demand/high skills in that role, while if it is a minimum wage role then there is no shortage or the employer wouldn't be paying minimum wage and no need to bring someone in for it.

Heavily regionally discriminatory. There are relatively few jobs in the NE that pay mean UK average. Besides, today's announcement just scrapped the need for a job offer. So, we don't know their salary. That is obviously not the route we are going down.
An interesting example, is of course, care work. There are labour shortages in this sector. It is badly paid. No bugger wants to do it. Why not? Cos it is bloody hard work. Pay rates don't reflect the market rate, cos the government won't bite the bullet and force people to pay the going rate, or, alternatively, subsidise it up to a reasonable level. As you correctly point out, there is no great pool of the unemployed out there to do this work. How to square the circle?

HYUFD said:

PClipp said:

HYUFD said:

Given Boris leads Corbyn 39% to 19% as preferred PM with YouGov today amongst all voters (including even leading Corbyn 32% to 23% with 25 to 49 year olds, 30% to 24% in London and 31% to 28% in Scotland) I doubt he is too bothered
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8i9x45cenq/TheTimes_190806_VI_Trackers_w.pdf

Almost anybody could come out ahead of Corbyn, MrHY. Do you think that even you couldn`t?

The problem that you Tories face is that now there are four nationwide parties in the running. It is no longer enough just to be preferable to Corbyn.

Oh absolutely it is given the majority of Tory marginal seats both defence and attack are against Labour

Several years ago, when the Lib Dems were still undeservedly under attack for having been in the Coalition Government with the dastardly Tories, and the Brexit Party Ltd did not even exist.

PClipp said:

Lib Dems hold the ward in Cambridge with a much increased majority. Good portent for Lib Dem gains in the next Westminster election.

Reminds me of the much missed Mark Senior now departed, posting Lib-Dem local by election successes late on a Thursday night...

ReggieCide said:

PClipp said:

HYUFD said:

Given Boris leads Corbyn 39% to 19% as preferred PM with YouGov today amongst all voters (including even leading Corbyn 32% to 23% with 25 to 49 year olds, 30% to 24% in London and 31% to 28% in Scotland) I doubt he is too bothered
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/8i9x45cenq/TheTimes_190806_VI_Trackers_w.pdf

Almost anybody could come out ahead of Corbyn, MrHY. Do you think that even you couldn`t?
The problem that you Tories face is that now there are four nationwide parties in the running. It is no longer enough just to be preferable to Corbyn.

I presume you mean Brexit & LD. So you seriously think they are in contention in a GE?

Since both Tories and Labour are rapidly disintegrating, it could well be so.

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

"Gone"?, he's always been mad.

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

It was one of the most bizarre interviews I have ever seen, the Fred Bloggs thing was proper mad

PClipp said:

Lib Dems hold the ward in Cambridge with a much increased majority. Good portent for Lib Dem gains in the next Westminster election.

hahahahahahaha

dixiedean said:

Philip_Thompson said:

dixiedean said:

Drutt said:

On topic, is it the PM/LOTO 'best PM' margin or the raw approval numbers that are the best indication of electoral success? C'mon, someone on here must keep a spreadsheet.

On the Boris-headhunting-overseas scientists point, it's always seemed self-evident to me that a mature economy should treat immigration the same way a business should treat recruitment. Establish the nature, size and shape of the shortfall you have, seek applications, select from applicants.

Assuming (and this may be a bit of a reach) that the electorate agrees broadly with the Gov view of 'recruitment' need, nobody resents the new kid as a freeloader, easing community harmony to boot.

Indeed so. What evidence do we have that this will be done fairly, efficiently and competently? Besides, I was labouring under the misapprehension that the Tories believed the market, not the Nationalised Immigration Board, to be the best allocator of resources.

I do believe in the market. I think there is a market-based way to solve this.

Set an income based threshold, perhaps say top 40 percentile of UK wages, and if a prospective migrant is getting a job with a salary over that threshold let them in. If they're not then don't.

It's just a starting point suggestion but is a market-based one. If there is high wages for the job then that would imply there is high demand/high skills in that role, while if it is a minimum wage role then there is no shortage or the employer wouldn't be paying minimum wage and no need to bring someone in for it.

Heavily regionally discriminatory. There are relatively few jobs in the NE that pay mean UK average. Besides, today's announcement just scrapped the need for a job offer. So, we don't know their salary. That is obviously not the route we are going down.
An interesting example, is of course, care work. There are labour shortages in this sector. It is badly paid. No bugger wants to do it. Why not? Cos it is bloody hard work. Pay rates don't reflect the market rate, cos the government won't bite the bullet and force people to pay the going rate, or, alternatively, subsidise it up to a reasonable level. As you correctly point out, there is no great pool of the unemployed out there to do this work. How to square the circle?

This is supply and demand economics, red in tooth and claw.

Portillos two-part documentary on the Tories and Brexit on Channel 5 was very good I thought.

Can recommend it.

Good night PB.

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

Seems as likely as about twenty other scenarios to be honest.

Nobody has a f**king clue what will happen/

We're going to leave the EU on 31st October.

The only question is whether there will be an agreement or whether we leave without a deal.

Boris and Cummings have outplayed and outmaneuvered our dimwitted MPs...

Cables fanciful ravings on Newsnight are a sign he knows the games up.

Which raises another scenario about November 1 GE. We could, of course, then elect a government to take us straight back in.
The referendum will have been respected. We voted to Leave, we left. For one day.
I trust there will be no moaning and whinging should that occur.

If Corbyn became PM to delay Brexit prior to a GE, I wonder what would happen to Sterling. Normally it would rise with a Brexit delay but then again, Corbyn is in Downing Street... 🤷‍♂️

PClipp said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1159594113215422464?s=21
Swinsurge continues

Tories up 0.2%, Labour down 18%, Labour to Tory swing 9%, more evidence for Boris bounce!!

In a seat which the Lib Dems held with an increased majority. Moreover in a Labour-held Westminster seat. Sorry, my old friend HY. The Conservative Party is a spent and broken force. Its collapse into fascism means that it will never come back into office by traditional legitimate processes.

On a 9% swing from Labour even in Remainer full Cambridge the Tories would win a comfortable majority

PClipp said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1159594113215422464?s=21
Swinsurge continues

Tories up 0.2%, Labour down 18%, Labour to Tory swing 9%, more evidence for Boris bounce!!

In a seat which the Lin Dems held with an increased majority. Moreover in a Labour-held Westminster seat. Sorry, my old friend HY. The Conservative Party is a spent and broken force. Its collapse into fascism means that it will never come back into office by traditional legitimate processes.

"Traditional Legitimate processes"? Does that include elections or what? If so, rigged or not? It's past your bedtime.

dixiedean said:

GIN1138 said:

rottenborough said:

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

Seems as likely as about twenty other scenarios to be honest.

Nobody has a f**king clue what will happen/

We're going to leave the EU on 31st October.

The only question is whether there will be an agreement or whether we leave without a deal.

Boris and Cummings have outplayed and outmaneuvered our dimwitted MPs...

Cables fanciful ravings on Newsnight are a sign he knows the games up.

Which raises another scenario about November 1 GE. We could, of course, then elect a government to take us straight back in.
The referendum will have been respected. We voted to Leave, we left. For one day.
I trust there will be no moaning and whinging should that occur.

Absolutely if a party is elected on a manifesto to have a referendum on whether to rejoin or not then that would be entirely reasonable.

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

HYUFD said:

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

Are you stereotyping plumbers and construction workers by saying they all go to Benidorm for 2 weeks?

How patronising.

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

Are you stereotyping all plumbers and construction workers by saying they all go to Benidorm for 2 weeks?

How patronising.

It is not patronising it is a fact that Spain is the most visited country by British holidaymakers, with 13 million visitors from the UK to Spain in 2016 for example, ahead of France despite it being nearer in second place and almost three times the number of visitors to 3rd placed Italy

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/datablog/2016/jul/30/where-do-brits-go-on-holiday

HYUFD said:

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

Must skilled construction workers earn way above average wage. Doubt they'd be slumming it on the Costas. Florida, Canada or Thailand at,the very least. Gambia is popular too, and Seville and Madrid, if it must be Spain.

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

Are you stereotyping all plumbers and construction workers by saying they all go to Benidorm for 2 weeks?

How patronising.

It is not patronising it is a fact that Spain is the most visited country by British holidaymakers, with 13 million visitors from the UK to Spain in 2016 for example, ahead of France despite it being nearer in second place and almost three times the number of visitors to 3rd placed Italy

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/datablog/2016/jul/30/where-do-brits-go-on-holiday

Yes, but. As I, and others who have wearily retreated from the field, have been trying to point out. Construction workers, and C2s in general, are not average. They are way above average income.

A thought in response to Boris' latest threat of having a general election in the immediate aftermath of no deal Brexit: I think this can be avoided by Parliament simply holding its fire on the VONC until early October. This has several benefits:

1) If Boris is able to hold on through the 14 days, he will still face an election, except it will be almost a month after no deal Brexit has happened and getting towards December - much less to his advantage than if the election was held before the consequences of no deal are felt

2) Corbyn is marginally more likely to accept a compromise candidate if the clock is ticking close to zero and there's no possibility of arranging an election before the hard Brexit date

3) Finally, it means that, if Parliament is successful in forming a government of national unity, it will still have a couple of weeks to agree an extension

Any thoughts on the potential downsides to this?

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Gallowgate said:

HYUFD said:

viewcode said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

Fourth. Rate. Like the skills needed for plumbing and construction work apparently!

Sixth like the annual percentage cut in wages for British plumbers and construction workers diehard Remainers would ensure by keeping free movement from the EU for workers in those areas

Brexit, and the cackhanded way it is being implemented, has ensured that the pounds that they are paid in have decreased in value by ~25% since the day the referendum date was announced (£1=~$1.6 to £1=~$1.2). So they can now buy less from a smaller pool and can travel less with what they have.

In the UK they can buy far more and that is where they do most of their spending outside a fortnight sojourn to the Costas

Are you stereotyping all plumbers and construction workers by saying they all go to Benidorm for 2 weeks?

How patronising.

It is not patronising it is a fact that Spain is the most visited country by British holidaymakers, with 13 million visitors from the UK to Spain in 2016 for example, ahead of France despite it being nearer in second place and almost three times the number of visitors to 3rd placed Italy

https://www.theguardian.com/travel/datablog/2016/jul/30/where-do-brits-go-on-holiday

Yes, but. As I, and others who have wearily retreated from the field, have been trying to point out. Construction workers, and C2s in general, are not average. They are way above average income.

C2s are not on 'way above average income' and nor is the average building site worker, surveyors and managers maybe but they are more ABs than C2s

dixiedean said:

Sean_F said:

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.
Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.
Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

Boris Johnson may well be forced out. But, only Corbyn can replace him.

That is the line it suits both Labour and Tories to push right now. And it may well turn out to be true.

On the other hand,nobody trusts a word of what Labour and the Tories say. So it may well not be true.

Philip_Thompson said:

dixiedean said:

Heavily regionally discriminatory. There are relatively few jobs in the NE that pay mean UK average. Besides, today's announcement just scrapped the need for a job offer. So, we don't know their salary. That is obviously not the route we are going down.
An interesting example, is of course, care work. There are labour shortages in this sector. It is badly paid. No bugger wants to do it. Why not? Cos it is bloody hard work. Pay rates don't reflect the market rate, cos the government won't bite the bullet and force people to pay the going rate, or, alternatively, subsidise it up to a reasonable level. As you correctly point out, there is no great pool of the unemployed out there to do this work. How to square the circle?

They won't need a job offer if they're in certain fields. That doesn't apply to everyone and their uncle.

We have more than one way to apply for a visa. My proposal could be one of them, it doesn't have to be the only one. As for the being regionally-discriminatory is that not the case with migration already? I suppose you could adjust it though, many jobs on national pay scales have a premium if you work in London, you could that that with the threshold too. If the job offer is in an area with a problem with house prices [ie London and the SE] increase the threshold proportionately.

As for care homes, people will have to pay the going rate if they can't fill the roles. That is the point of a going rate. It is bloody hard work, so why should its pay not reflect that?

Fair enough. Care work would collapse tomorrow without immigrants though. Some thinking about this from those who are in government would be appreciated. Like a lot of stuff they aren't providing much detail. In fact, I'd be a lot less anti-Brexit if any kind of idea of what comes next had been provided.
I realise you have your own piratey solutions, which is fine, and logical, etc. However, yours is a niche view, and you aren't running the show.
Anyway, good night.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/1159194123108257793

Thanks to the efforts of one of our new MEPs, this story was proven not to be a hoax...

dixiedean said:

Philip_Thompson said:

dixiedean said:

Heavily regionally discriminatory. There are relatively few jobs in the NE that pay mean UK average. Besides, today's announcement just scrapped the need for a job offer. So, we don't know their salary. That is obviously not the route we are going down.
An interesting example, is of course, care work. There are labour shortages in this sector. It is badly paid. No bugger wants to do it. Why not? Cos it is bloody hard work. Pay rates don't reflect the market rate, cos the government won't bite the bullet and force people to pay the going rate, or, alternatively, subsidise it up to a reasonable level. As you correctly point out, there is no great pool of the unemployed out there to do this work. How to square the circle?

They won't need a job offer if they're in certain fields. That doesn't apply to everyone and their uncle.

We have more than one way to apply for a visa. My proposal could be one of them, it doesn't have to be the only one. As for the being regionally-discriminatory is that not the case with migration already? I suppose you could adjust it though, many jobs on national pay scales have a premium if you work in London, you could that that with the threshold too. If the job offer is in an area with a problem with house prices [ie London and the SE] increase the threshold proportionately.

As for care homes, people will have to pay the going rate if they can't fill the roles. That is the point of a going rate. It is bloody hard work, so why should its pay not reflect that?

Fair enough. Care work would collapse tomorrow without immigrants though. Some thinking about this from those who are in government would be appreciated. Like a lot of stuff they aren't providing much detail. In fact, I'd be a lot less anti-Brexit if any kind of idea of what comes next had been provided.
I realise you have your own piratey solutions, which is fine, and logical, etc. However, yours is a niche view, and you aren't running the show.
Anyway, good night.

I don't see why care work would collapse, especially if pay rates for care workers goes up. This idea local people don't work in care is a total myth.

According to this news article from the Guardian the proportion of care workers from other countries varies dramatically by region, from 98% of North-East care workers to 88% of London care workers NOT being from other European countries. Overall those NOT from other European countries represent 93% of the care workforce: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/25/brexit-fears-eu-nationals-working-social-care-theresa-may-sarah-wollaston

Given we've already said [quite rightly] that those already here should be able to remain, why should anything collapse? 93% of the workforce will be totally unaffected by any changes, the 7% already here will be unaffected too.

Philip_Thompson said:

@dixiedean I edited my last post so you might not have seen it in full.

How is this for a regionally-adjusted and dynamic free market migration policy: Set a pay threshold at x% of regional house prices.

If you were to say 15% of regional house prices then a threshold of just over £24k would exist in the North West. A threshold of just under £19k in the North East, £48k for the South East and £71k in London.

If a region would like to attract more migrants, they would need to ensure that homes are built to ensure they are affordable.

This could be devolved to Scotland [like it is somewhat devolved in Canada] but if they kept a similar proposal their threshold would be £22.5k

There could be other alternative schemes available for fields we want like scientists and NHS but this would be open to anyone with a clean criminal record who met the threshold.

Yep. When I investigated re-emigrating back to Canada, this was very big on the points. Basically if you could survive Yukon winters you could get in. However, that was dependant on strong Provincial de-centralised government. Another area on which Brexit ministers haven't provided any evidence of thought. Not your job to do it for them of course, but the narrowness of ideas, from them, not you, as you are putting some thought into it, does not inspire confidence.

PClipp said:

Britain Elects
@britainelects
·
1m
Claines (Worcester) result:

LDEM: 47.6% (+9.3)
CON: 45.6% (+5.2)
GRN: 4.6% (-0.6)
LAB: 2.2% (-12.4)

Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative.

8.8% swing from LAB to CON

Philip_Thompson said:

PClipp said:

Britain Elects @britainelects

Claines (Worcester) result:

LDEM: 47.6% (+9.3)
CON: 45.6% (+5.2)
GRN: 4.6% (-0.6)
LAB: 2.2% (-12.4)

Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative.

8.8% swing from LAB to CON

Are you part of the HY team, Mr Thompson?

Broken corrupt Tories on the slide everywhere. 😜

PClipp said:

PClipp said:

Philip_Thompson said:

PClipp said:

Britain Elects @britainelects

Claines (Worcester) result:

LDEM: 47.6% (+9.3)
CON: 45.6% (+5.2)
GRN: 4.6% (-0.6)
LAB: 2.2% (-12.4)

Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative.

8.8% swing from LAB to CON

Are you part of the HY team, Mr Thompson?

Broken corrupt Tories on the slide everywhere. 😜

PS Decent respectable Conservatives have already left the former Conservative Party. How many are on the point of doing so? Just asking.....

I'd like to say I'm a decent, respectable Conservative that is rejoining the Conservative Party.

Speaking as a socially liberal, fiscally dry Conservative it is a shame that socially liberal, fiscally dry and obsessed with Europe Conservatives like TSE have felt the need to leave

Ratters said:

A thought in response to Boris' latest threat of having a general election in the immediate aftermath of no deal Brexit: I think this can be avoided by Parliament simply holding its fire on the VONC until early October. This has several benefits:

1) If Boris is able to hold on through the 14 days, he will still face an election, except it will be almost a month after no deal Brexit has happened and getting towards December - much less to his advantage than if the election was held before the consequences of no deal are felt

2) Corbyn is marginally more likely to accept a compromise candidate if the clock is ticking close to zero and there's no possibility of arranging an election before the hard Brexit date

3) Finally, it means that, if Parliament is successful in forming a government of national unity, it will still have a couple of weeks to agree an extension

Any thoughts on the potential downsides to this?

Agree - which may be why Cummings et al are trying to panic the Commons into an early VONC - he may be absolutist about Brexit, but the only thing Johnson is absolutist about is his career.

Italian governing coalition between Lega Nord and Five Star breaks up as Lega leader and Deputy PM Matteo Salvini calls for a general election.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49287219

Latest Italian poll has Lega 38% Democratic Party 22%, Five Star 17.5% and Forza Italia 8%
https://www.termometropolitico.it/1451088_sondaggi-elettorali-tecne-lega-al-38-pd-e-m5s-distanti.html

Boris Johnson could become the shortest serving PM, ever!

The so called Boris bounce is very weak imo. The Tories are on less than when they were flatlineing in the late 1990s and 2000s!

Philip_Thompson said:

CarlottaVance said:

Ratters said:

A thought in response to Boris' latest threat of having a general election in the immediate aftermath of no deal Brexit: I think this can be avoided by Parliament simply holding its fire on the VONC until early October. This has several benefits:

1) If Boris is able to hold on through the 14 days, he will still face an election, except it will be almost a month after no deal Brexit has happened and getting towards December - much less to his advantage than if the election was held before the consequences of no deal are felt

2) Corbyn is marginally more likely to accept a compromise candidate if the clock is ticking close to zero and there's no possibility of arranging an election before the hard Brexit date

3) Finally, it means that, if Parliament is successful in forming a government of national unity, it will still have a couple of weeks to agree an extension

Any thoughts on the potential downsides to this?

Agree - which may be why Cummings et al are trying to panic the Commons into an early VONC - he may be absolutist about Brexit, but the only thing Johnson is absolutist about is his career.

You think they're trying to panic them into a VONC? It seemed to me the opposite.

The whole point of saying it's too late to force an early election seems to me to be to prevent a VONC. If it's too late to hold an election to prevent Brexit then why bother?

Because its not too late to create a GONU from the current parliament if its clear Johnson is heading for the cliff. That may concentrate a few minds. The "cunning plan" is predicated on Parliament being dissolved before Johnson can be replaced. If however that fails and Parliament replaces him and extends or revokes, all bets are off.

Reharding the recent discussion about possible Trump impeachment, we now have a likely timescale:
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/456805-nadler-this-is-formal-impeachment-proceedings

CarlottaVance said:

PClipp said:

Continuing with my Mark Senior tribute act.....

Britain Elects @britainelects

Claines (Worcester) result:

LDEM: 47.6% (+9.3)
CON: 45.6% (+5.2)
GRN: 4.6% (-0.6)
LAB: 2.2% (-12.4)

Liberal Democrat GAIN from Conservative.

Two out of the three seats this evening go to the Lib Dems.

A win's a win - but the Tory vote held up well......

Evidence that those who are suggesting the (?) forthcoming election isn’t going to see big vote switches between the remain parties are clinging to false hope. Labour’s result is more dramatic in proportional terms than at Brecon.

BoZo...

Boris Johnson was accused by a Nobel laureate last night of taking scientists “for fools” after he announced plans to attract the “best minds from around the world” after Brexit.

Announcing an overhaul of the immigration system, the prime minister promised to make it easier for leading academics to settle in Britain when it had left the European Union.

His proposal was ridiculed by the world-leading physicist Professor Sir Andre Geim, whose discovery of graphene was lauded by Mr Johnson in his announcement.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/brexit-dont-take-us-for-fools-top-scientist-warns-boris-johnson-wrqbk35wp

The sole qualification for being Director of a National Intelligence is, apparently, having “a close bond with Trump”:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/no-2-intelligence-official-resigning-trump-announces/2019/08/08/9ed9d266-b54e-11e9-951e-de024209545d_story.html
Democratic and Republican lawmakers had said they wanted Gordon, a career intelligence official, to fill in for Coats. But Trump was reluctant to keep someone with whom he had never formed a close bond. The president and his aides also regarded her as a career official and consequently suspicious, according to officials with knowledge of the president’s views. ...

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1159696094571433994

FPT - I’m a bit late to the Tissue Price party here but I’ve just looked up the impeachment bets. I note that Betfair exchange pays out on the process starting with the House voting by a simple majority for his impeachment and *not* his actual impeachment and removal from office following a 2/3rds majority in the senate.

Given those rules it’s definitely value and should probably be priced about Evens. Otherwise I’d expect full impeachment with a Senate 2/3rds majority at well north of 12/1 before I was interested.

Good morning, everyone.

Pissing it down here. Hope Whaley Bridge residents don't find the reservoir's dangerously full again.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1159696094571433994

Are these people really so daft as to think that the effects of nodeal will only be felt on November 1st? As if somehow the markets (and for that matter consumers, businesses etc) are just going to be sitting around assuming some sort of last minute resolution will turn up at 11pm the day before?

(This is, of course, also the obvious flaw in the suggested “have an election on Nov 1st before the queues at Dover start to form argument)

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

GIN1138 said:

Juat saw daft Dr Cable on Newnight saying that Boris will be forced out.

Then "Fred Blogg" will become PM of some as yet unformed Parliamantary grouping purely to stop Brexit with absoultely no mandate from anyone.

Has the silly old duffer gone mad?

Boris Johnson may well be forced out. But, only Corbyn can replace him.

Is that true, though?

What about an alternative neutral Tory leader that has crossparty appeal as a temporary stopgap to halt a No Deal Brexit? Like Lidington?

It’s unlikely, yes, and would cause a lot of fall out in both Labour and the Conservatives but not impossible.

Once again, I got 100/1 on Caroline Lucas last night. Any conceivable unity Prime Minister has to be acceptable to Jeremy Corbyn, and unthreatening, if it isn’t going to be him.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1159696094571433994

It’s a bank holiday in most of Europe