Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chronicle of a bet foretold Part 2

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited September 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Chronicle of a bet foretold Part 2

It is 11am on September 21st 2019 as I write this. Earlier in the year I wrote an article about fixed-odds betting used to insure against political risk. I finished by saying I would investigate other modes, specifically currency conversion. This is that investigation.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • PendduPenddu Posts: 265
    I am in the fortunate position of having a salary fixed in USD which I then change into EUR or GBP when it suits me - so for last few months when GBP-USD was stable at 1.30 I held my money in EUR in anticipation of Brexit unravelling towards a no-deal (thanks Boris). When rate moved to 1.20 I moved it to GBP, and made a few thousand GBP in the process. In anticipation of Deal or Revoke I am going to move to GBP straight away for next few months.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,382
    The article says you can do political spread betting with IG Index.

    However I can't see any political markets on their website. Can anyone provide a link?

    In contrast, all of Sporting Index's GE markets are listed on one page which was linked in a thread header a few weeks ago.
  • I thought there was a greater range of financial bets on Betfair but I've obviously not been paying attention because there is almost nothing there now.
  • With respect to conversion costs you might want to look into Revolut.
  • Viewcode's header mentions the need to provide proof of identity when opening accounts (and perhaps these days, proof of solvency as well).

    It has belatedly dawned on the government that this is a disaster waiting to happen because sooner or later, one of the umpteen places now holding copies of our passports will leak them.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/19/warning-uploading-copies-passport-online-government-launches/

    Quite what the answer is, aside from backdoor attempts to create a central ID repository, who knows?
  • At the time of the Brexit referendum, some of my son's work colleagues were going on holiday to Spain but were concerned that their holiday was shortly after the referendum, and weren't sure whether to buy their euros before or after the vote.
    So they hedged their bets by buying USD before the vote, so they wouldn't lose (apart from conversion costs) either way.
  • Dan Hodges has noticed that Johnson has backed himself into a corner.

    https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1175646068589170688?s=21
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,715
    edited September 2019

    Viewcode's header mentions the need to provide proof of identity when opening accounts (and perhaps these days, proof of solvency as well).

    It has belatedly dawned on the government that this is a disaster waiting to happen because sooner or later, one of the umpteen places now holding copies of our passports will leak them.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/19/warning-uploading-copies-passport-online-government-launches/

    Quite what the answer is, aside from backdoor attempts to create a central ID repository, who knows?

    This is why decentralized systems - in this context things like Augur - are useful: Basically any government-approved financial service requires its operators to apply pre-internet-thinking identity verification, which will create headaches for people who try to use them, leak their data, and fail to do what they were intended because the people they're hoping to target can use someone else's leaked data.

    With peer-to-peer systems, there's no reliance on identity (since this doesn't work on the internet), and no operator who is required to operate them in a broken way on behalf of the government.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited September 2019
    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.
  • I’ve been saying Lauara Pidcock would be a decent bet as Corbyn’s successor for a while. Looks like others are beginning to notice her. What we can be sure of is that whoever ends up in the contest Labour members will choose the candidate most likely to repel most voters.
    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-jeremy-corbyn-laura-pidcock_uk_5d823f62e4b0957256af7be6
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    Dan Carden's interview has been shambolic. Does even he believe the rubbish he's spouting about a new deal in three months?

    Not that the interviewer's bizarre claims about OFSTED are any better.
  • Dan Hodges has noticed that Johnson has backed himself into a corner.

    https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1175646068589170688?s=21

    I share Dan Hodges' view that Over the past week it has become increasingly hard to discern what strategy Boris is actually pursuing.

    Not just the past week, come to that. And especially not the part that needed the EU not to read British newspapers where Boris had explained he was bluffing.

    One thing that was clear was that Boris was desperate for a snap general election before Brexit, before its adverse consequences became apparent to voters.

    Beyond that, who knows? I am not sure Boris, Dominic Cummings (and presumably Lynton Crosby) have the same hymn sheet.

    Boris needs a Jeremy Corbyn-led, minority Labour government for a couple of weeks to revoke or extend Article 50, then call the election which Boris can then fight as the champion of the people against the Establishment because right now, the millionaire, Old Etonian, Oxford-educated prime minister is the Establishment, and worse, he'd have lied to the people.
  • I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    That much was obvious when it was first posted. Question is, does it matter very much either way? All politicians have their supporters as well as their detractors. There are serious issues afoot and this is just trivia.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    F1: Ricciardo disqualified for power breach. Not sure if he starts at the back of the grid or the pit lane.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,659

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
    Perhaps some of the 200 000 members who voted for him as Deputy Leader are at Conference.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
    All looks a bit fake but I think it is reflective of something, things being of minor (or no) importance has never been a bar to discussion on PB.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?
  • Dan Hodges has noticed that Johnson has backed himself into a corner.

    https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1175646068589170688?s=21

    I share Dan Hodges' view that Over the past week it has become increasingly hard to discern what strategy Boris is actually pursuing.

    Not just the past week, come to that. And especially not the part that needed the EU not to read British newspapers where Boris had explained he was bluffing.

    One thing that was clear was that Boris was desperate for a snap general election before Brexit, before its adverse consequences became apparent to voters.

    Beyond that, who knows? I am not sure Boris, Dominic Cummings (and presumably Lynton Crosby) have the same hymn sheet.

    Boris needs a Jeremy Corbyn-led, minority Labour government for a couple of weeks to revoke or extend Article 50, then call the election which Boris can then fight as the champion of the people against the Establishment because right now, the millionaire, Old Etonian, Oxford-educated prime minister is the Establishment, and worse, he'd have lied to the people.
    Perhaps Boris should now grasp the straw previously advocated on pb -- basically May's deal but with a massively extended transition period to spaff some money on some nerds to develop the technical infrastructure for a frictionless border. We can then leave on halloween as advertised but it will be BINO so there will not be immediate disruption as Boris goes to the polls.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738
    Foxy said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
    Perhaps some of the 200 000 members who voted for him as Deputy Leader are at Conference.
    Nah, they'll have gone home by now, Liberal Democrat conference was last week.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 188
    If there is no deal and GBP goes anywhere near 1.05 I would advise you to square up and even go long very quickly. It is obvious from the price action that the market is short and GBP is already cheap and would be extravagantly so then. It would recover very quickly. Personally I don't think it will break 1.10 and will act accordingly.

    A Corbyn government (rather than Labour government with Corbyn as PM) would be a very different matter but I see no prospect of it happening.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2019
    ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Most likely it is a sign that the Sunday Times, which splashed Fisher's departure, is paywalled so the hoi polloi must turn to the BBC to discover what it is all about.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,037
    ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    It’s a function of who reads political stories in the early hours of Sunday morning.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited September 2019
    Foxy said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
    Perhaps some of the 200 000 members who voted for him as Deputy Leader are at Conference.
    TBH I see many of them scolding themselves and/or Tom on twitter, people who voted for Tom and people who now support Tom aren't the same groups at all.

    Edit: Obviously there would be an overlap but Tom was appealing to different groups then and now.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,904
    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. Firstly, unless you are exceptionally liquid you are at best hedging your risks. So if I bought $10k in the expectation that the dollar was going to strengthen it would do no more than offset the fact that the balance of my money is in Sterling, eg my house. Looking at that $10k in isolation is more than somewhat artificial.

    Secondly, currency movements are much more complicated than most of us have the time or ability to comprehend. So again using the $ as an example it has a safe haven status which means when things like the Saudi oil attacks occur it tends to strengthen. To assume that Sterling will move "because of Brexit" ignores many other factors that influence its rating every day. The Brexit effect may be large enough to overwhelm these other effects but it may not.

    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited September 2019
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/emeryjuliette1/status/1175499866904117249

    If you watch the video Tom Watson's great reception seems to mostly consist of about 6 people who seem to follow him around to cheer him.

    I'm not sure if it is good PR or not but the fact he felt the need to try and show he has support is quite telling IMO.

    Might just be local constituency members who travel with their MP? With all else going on, rather thin gruel.
    Perhaps some of the 200 000 members who voted for him as Deputy Leader are at Conference.
    Nah, they'll have gone home by now, Liberal Democrat conference was last week.
    And the Conservative conference is next week, and clashes with Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. You will have seen the angry complaints, oh, hold on, no, these clashes only matter when it's Labour. As you were. Stand easy.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Not sure if it states it on the BBC story but I understand (seen somewhere) he'll be sticking around for (if) an Autumn election so whilst losing him is bad news we have got him for the most important part to come.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 17,529
    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 188
    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. Firstly, unless you are exceptionally liquid you are at best hedging your risks. So if I bought $10k in the expectation that the dollar was going to strengthen it would do no more than offset the fact that the balance of my money is in Sterling, eg my house. Looking at that $10k in isolation is more than somewhat artificial.

    Secondly, currency movements are much more complicated than most of us have the time or ability to comprehend. So again using the $ as an example it has a safe haven status which means when things like the Saudi oil attacks occur it tends to strengthen. To assume that Sterling will move "because of Brexit" ignores many other factors that influence its rating every day. The Brexit effect may be large enough to overwhelm these other effects but it may not.

    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?

    I think the proposal is to scrap it, and replace it with a more local system, accountable to councils.

    Abolishing OFSTED is LD policy too:

    https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1175520961434718209?s=19

    The CQC could do with similar treatment. It combines superficiality and intrusive officious box ticking much like OFSTED.
  • ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Not sure if it states it on the BBC story but I understand (seen somewhere) he'll be sticking around for (if) an Autumn election so whilst losing him is bad news we have got him for the most important part to come.
    Yes, always positive to have disillusioned key staffers serving out their notice periods during a General Election campaign.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,904
    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. Firstly, unless you are exceptionally liquid you are at best hedging your risks. So if I bought $10k in the expectation that the dollar was going to strengthen it would do no more than offset the fact that the balance of my money is in Sterling, eg my house. Looking at that $10k in isolation is more than somewhat artificial.

    Secondly, currency movements are much more complicated than most of us have the time or ability to comprehend. So again using the $ as an example it has a safe haven status which means when things like the Saudi oil attacks occur it tends to strengthen. To assume that Sterling will move "because of Brexit" ignores many other factors that influence its rating every day. The Brexit effect may be large enough to overwhelm these other effects but it may not.

    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.
    There are a variety of instruments open to the Bank. They are not restricted to their reserves. Interest rates is one example but so is the equivalent of QE such as the Draghi punt did for various EZ bonds that were going down the toilet. As I say such steps may not be successful or wise but that doesn't mean that they would not happen.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited September 2019

    ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Not sure if it states it on the BBC story but I understand (seen somewhere) he'll be sticking around for (if) an Autumn election so whilst losing him is bad news we have got him for the most important part to come.
    Yes, always positive to have disillusioned key staffers serving out their notice periods during a General Election campaign.
    Even if we assume the Times story to be true one of his complaints is about not winning. He isn't say a Watson or someone he does actually want the party to succeed in the upcoming election.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 188
    DavidL said:

    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. F
    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.
    There are a variety of instruments open to the Bank. They are not restricted to their reserves. Interest rates is one example but so is the equivalent of QE such as the Draghi punt did for various EZ bonds that were going down the toilet. As I say such steps may not be successful or wise but that doesn't mean that they would not happen.
    Jacking up interest rates would send UK asset markets into meltdown - no way are they going to do that to a sufficient extent to influence the currency, it would probably have the opposite effect. Not quite sure what you mean by QE - buying even more government bonds injects cash into the market and drives the currency down, not up.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,738

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?

    The problem with OFSTED is it isn't very good at school inspections. That's always been an issue depending on who was leading it. It was forensic under Wilshaw (which did not of course make him popular) while under Spielmann it's turned into a bunch of basic waffly sound bites that mean nothing, largely because she is incompetent and picks incompetent people to work for her. It's dropped almost as far as it did under Woodhead, who imposed vast workloads and unnecessary regulations and strictures to show he could, in revenge for having been driven out of the teaching professsion.

    Where I have very strong reservations about this policy is that I think once you burrow down to the detail the implication is it will be reformed rather than abolished. Most of its functions would go to LEAs. Well, LEAs are pretty well gutted out right now, but even when they were strong they were so corrupt and incompetent that nothing ever got changed except the size of administrators' salaries. So that would not be a positive step. And then this 'back stop' inspection team is just another name for OFSTED.

    Putting real reform in place would be tough because unfortunately there is no perfect way of inspecting schools. But this is Blairite style over substance - again. It would make matters worse, not better.
  • ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Not sure if it states it on the BBC story but I understand (seen somewhere) he'll be sticking around for (if) an Autumn election so whilst losing him is bad news we have got him for the most important part to come.
    Yes, always positive to have disillusioned key staffers serving out their notice periods during a General Election campaign.
    Even if we assume the Times story to be true one of his complaints is about not winning. He isn't say a Watson or someone he does actually want the party to succeed in the upcoming election.
    "In a caustic memo to close colleagues, seen by this newspaper, Fisher denounced the leader’s team for their “lack of professionalism, competence and human decency” and said he was sick of their “blizzard of lies and excuses”."

    Yes, sounds like he'll be welcomed into a close knit team running Corbyn's campaign assuming none of them bear grudges (and that certainly isn't the Milne/Momentum way - very forgiving, collegiate folk by all accounts).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    Great article.

    My golden rules on this matter are (1) Keep it Simple and (2) Go where the transaction cost is smallest.

    This means, on the whole, and if there is a relevant market, use Betfair Exchange.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661
    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. Firstly, unless you are exceptionally liquid you are at best hedging your risks. So if I bought $10k in the expectation that the dollar was going to strengthen it would do no more than offset the fact that the balance of my money is in Sterling, eg my house. Looking at that $10k in isolation is more than somewhat artificial.

    Secondly, currency movements are much more complicated than most of us have the time or ability to comprehend. So again using the $ as an example it has a safe haven status which means when things like the Saudi oil attacks occur it tends to strengthen. To assume that Sterling will move "because of Brexit" ignores many other factors that influence its rating every day. The Brexit effect may be large enough to overwhelm these other effects but it may not.

    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    I largely agree. If Brexit does happen, I would expect a similar effect on markets as in June 2016, with Sterling and equities dropping, but then mostly recovering.

    I manage my own 6 figure equity savings, and moved my portfolio into cash, defensive stocks, and those earning in forex in the spring of 2016. I bought some bargains back in the summer at a 15-20% off their pre-vote prices. I made 5 figure nominal profits.

    I am following the same strategy now, wary too of the worldwide risks of recession. There aren't many bargains about any longer, as clearly I am not the only one thinking like this. I think the risk is now priced in, though there will be movement if the risk becomes manifest.

    I would caution anyone not to take investment advice off an anonymous physician on t'internet!



  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828

    ydoethur said:

    Lead politics story on BBC website - Labour to scrap OFSTED.

    Most popular politics story on the BBC website - Andrew Fisher quits Labour.

    I wonder if this is a sign Labour's populist approach isn't working anymore?

    Not sure if it states it on the BBC story but I understand (seen somewhere) he'll be sticking around for (if) an Autumn election so whilst losing him is bad news we have got him for the most important part to come.
    Yes, always positive to have disillusioned key staffers serving out their notice periods during a General Election campaign.
    Even if we assume the Times story to be true one of his complaints is about not winning. He isn't say a Watson or someone he does actually want the party to succeed in the upcoming election.
    "In a caustic memo to close colleagues, seen by this newspaper, Fisher denounced the leader’s team for their “lack of professionalism, competence and human decency” and said he was sick of their “blizzard of lies and excuses”."

    Yes, sounds like he'll be welcomed into a close knit team running Corbyn's campaign assuming none of them bear grudges (and that certainly isn't the Milne/Momentum way - very forgiving, collegiate folk by all accounts).
    Ahh yes of course, who can forget Corbyn facing down his critics and pushing through his policy of getting rid of trident, or intervening to deselect MPs who vote against him rather than letting local members decide.

    I bet the Brexiteers who wanted rid of the Tory rebels are gutted they had someone so forgiving like Cummings and Boris in charge rather than someone like Corbyn who instantly expels people who vote against the Labour whip regardless of members views.

    The fault with Corbyn is he is far too forgiving, going all the way to current Tory levels would be ridiculous but there is a balance.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    Cool drawing, but if the reality was the Labour members backed Watson over Corbyn then why doesn't he challenge Corbyn?

    Feel free to use your own words in response.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661
    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    It is ironic that Watson is being pilloried for advocating six months ago a policy that is now Labour Party policy, and strongly supported by the Shadow Chancellor*. In a more sane party that would be regarded as prophetic. It seems the Corbynites main objection is that the change didn't come from themselves.

    *Taking Labour anti-semitism seriously is Watsons other crime of course.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,904
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    I largely agree. If Brexit does happen, I would expect a similar effect on markets as in June 2016, with Sterling and equities dropping, but then mostly recovering.

    I manage my own 6 figure equity savings, and moved my portfolio into cash, defensive stocks, and those earning in forex in the spring of 2016. I bought some bargains back in the summer at a 15-20% off their pre-vote prices. I made 5 figure nominal profits.

    I am following the same strategy now, wary too of the worldwide risks of recession. There aren't many bargains about any longer, as clearly I am not the only one thinking like this. I think the risk is now priced in, though there will be movement if the risk becomes manifest.

    I would caution anyone not to take investment advice off an anonymous physician on t'internet!



    Our pension fund advisors have provided fairly spectacular returns on investments in the likes of Apple, Amazon, Alphabet etc. Not only have these shares done incredibly well for such large companies but the currency movements have then given them a "boost" to remarkable levels. We have been locking in some of these gains by selling down our investments albeit leaving plenty on the table. Again, I think that amateur hour is an issue as is the inability of most of us to achieve a sufficient spread of risk but this seems to me a much better way to play these markets than simple currency accounts.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,904
    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. F
    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.

    Fourthly, the market can be counter-intuitive. I was at a loss to understand why we should welcome Farage's "wall of money" that is supposedly going to pour into the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit but if he is right then there is the possibility that crashing stock market and property values will make UK assets cheap enough for traders to buy for the medium term. This might cause Sterling to move in a different way from which those of us who know insufficient about these things might expect.

    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.
    There are a variety of instruments open to the Bank. They are not restricted to their reserves. Interest rates is one example but so is the equivalent of QE such as the Draghi punt did for various EZ bonds that were going down the toilet. As I say such steps may not be successful or wise but that doesn't mean that they would not happen.
    Jacking up interest rates would send UK asset markets into meltdown - no way are they going to do that to a sufficient extent to influence the currency, it would probably have the opposite effect. Not quite sure what you mean by QE - buying even more government bonds injects cash into the market and drives the currency down, not up.
    I think I will just wish you good luck whilst making the observation that there are many other Sterling denominated assets than bonds which can influence market levels.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    It is ironic that Watson is being pilloried for advocating six months ago a policy that is now Labour Party policy, and strongly supported by the Shadow Chancellor*. In a more sane party that would be regarded as prophetic. It seems the Corbynites main objection is that the change didn't come from themselves.

    *Taking Labour anti-semitism seriously is Watsons other crime of course.
    Momentum are heavily remain, they don't dislike Watson because he is in favour of a referendum, McDonnell has been in favour of one as well and there are no moves to remove him.

    Watson is interested in fighting the leadership, this damages the party, removing his platform reduces the damage he can do.

    As someone who signed the 2nd referendum petition and the revoke petition (although the wording and timing was an important part of that) I want rid of Tom Watson because it makes it more likely we do get a 2nd referendum and avoid no deal. People don't dislike Watson because he wants a 2nd referendum, the vast majority of the party do, they dislike him because he harms the party and increases the chance of Conservative government.

    It is telling that many of Watsons fans (or those cheering him on in this circumstance) are those that do not wish Labour well. It is pretty obvious Labour members would not be part of that group.

    *TBH Lansman going for Watson is almost certainly anti semitism related.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,092
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,904
    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    I taught on the Diploma in Legal Practice for about 10 years teaching advocacy skills. The years I taught varied enormously in quality and motivation depending on a number of factors outwith my control such as how many had jobs at the end of the course. I suspect teachers would have similar problems and exam results would be a very crude way to assess them. Are teachers coping with additional need kids with English a second or third language really going to be compared with those coasting along in a "better" area with highly motivated parents giving support?

    This logic drives you down the path of trying to assess the value added by the teacher which in turn drives something like our current assessment regime. Given @ydoethur's reservations this seems not to work but exam results are not the answer either.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661
    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    FYI this is the LD policy, OFSTED replacement on page 27.


    https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1175527853649252353?s=19
  • ChrisChris Posts: 7,713
    Viewcode

    The currency level of sterling, relative to your Deal and No Deal targets, would imply a No Deal probability of 40-50%, whereas the betting markets are putting it around 20%.

    Since parliament "took control," the pound has gained about 4 cents against the dollar, and the implied probability of No Deal on the betting markets has halved.

    There's something out of kilter somewhere in these figures, but who knows what?
  • Excellent article.

    Most importantly, viewcode touches upon the importance of managing your emotions in betting, which is just as crucial as applying your judgement and analysis if you want to make a profit.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 188
    DavidL said:

    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. F


    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.

    There are a variety of instruments open to the Bank. They are not restricted to their reserves. Interest rates is one example but so is the equivalent of QE such as the Draghi punt did for various EZ bonds that were going down the toilet. As I say such steps may not be successful or wise but that doesn't mean that they would not happen.
    Jacking up interest rates would send UK asset markets into meltdown - no way are they going to do that to a sufficient extent to influence the currency, it would probably have the opposite effect. Not quite sure what you mean by QE - buying even more government bonds injects cash into the market and drives the currency down, not up.
    I think I will just wish you good luck whilst making the observation that there are many other Sterling denominated assets than bonds which can influence market levels.
    Again I'm not quite sure what you mean. There are bonds, there is cash or near cash. There are equities - nobody in their right mind is going to suggest intervention in that market. What other instruments are there? Property?

    I wish you luck also, but as the saying goes, if you are relying on luck you shouldn't be doing it!

    I am happy to bet with anyone that there will be no significant intervention with a view to affecting the level of the currency.

    As an aside the last time there was coordinated G7 intervention was in September 2000 as the euro was crashing to disturbing lows. This was obviously pretty serious stuff. The result was that the euro FELL up to another 10pct to a record low over the next month. This was a searingly memorable experience for the G7 treasuries and for anyone trading at the time.

    [I was a currency trader on and off for about 20 years - my career efforts for various employers well into the 9 figure range, so definitely a professional but not in the elite.]

  • Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    Cool drawing, but if the reality was the Labour members backed Watson over Corbyn then why doesn't he challenge Corbyn?

    Feel free to use your own words in response.
    That's not the point the cartoon is making, though.

    It's saying what Labour members - very many of them strong Corbyn supporters - is Labour's Brexit policy mess and NOT Watson's place in the Party (even those who rather dislike him).

    Meanwhile Corbyn and his lieutenants have been focussed on the factional battle, not the key policy question - the most important in recent political history.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661
    edited September 2019

    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    It is ironic that Watson is being pilloried for advocating six months ago a policy that is now Labour Party policy, and strongly supported by the Shadow Chancellor*. In a more sane party that would be regarded as prophetic. It seems the Corbynites main objection is that the change didn't come from themselves.

    *Taking Labour anti-semitism seriously is Watsons other crime of course.
    Momentum are heavily remain, they don't dislike Watson because he is in favour of a referendum, McDonnell has been in favour of one as well and there are no moves to remove him.

    Watson is interested in fighting the leadership, this damages the party, removing his platform reduces the damage he can do.

    As someone who signed the 2nd referendum petition and the revoke petition (although the wording and timing was an important part of that) I want rid of Tom Watson because it makes it more likely we do get a 2nd referendum and avoid no deal. People don't dislike Watson because he wants a 2nd referendum, the vast majority of the party do, they dislike him because he harms the party and increases the chance of Conservative government.

    It is telling that many of Watsons fans (or those cheering him on in this circumstance) are those that do not wish Labour well. It is pretty obvious Labour members would not be part of that group.

    *TBH Lansman going for Watson is almost certainly anti semitism related.
    Yes, I carefully phrased my post. Momentum is pro-Remain, though the Corbynite Lexiteers take a different view.

    I am sure that you are right. "Not supporting the leader" is the Corbynite euphemism for tackling anti-semitism and entryism in the Labour Party.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    ydoethur said:

    Dan Carden's interview has been shambolic. Does even he believe the rubbish he's spouting about a new deal in three months?

    Not that the interviewer's bizarre claims about OFSTED are any better.

    A deal is perfectly possible in 3 months because Labour aren’t wedded to Mays red lines.

  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    So after the selective quoting of Junckers interview was leapt on as full steam ahead to a deal the full interview shows a rather different picture and since then has been superceded by the latest delusional nonsense from the governments technical non-papers!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:
    Ridge once again misses the chance to ask who would bum, man and pay for the border.

    Hopeless fawning.
  • Foxy said:

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?

    I think the proposal is to scrap it, and replace it with a more local system, accountable to councils.

    Abolishing OFSTED is LD policy too:

    https://twitter.com/LaylaMoran/status/1175520961434718209?s=19

    The CQC could do with similar treatment. It combines superficiality and intrusive officious box ticking much like OFSTED.
    Yep, it’s about protecting producer interests.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    edited September 2019

    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    Cool drawing, but if the reality was the Labour members backed Watson over Corbyn then why doesn't he challenge Corbyn?

    Feel free to use your own words in response.
    That's not the point the cartoon is making, though.

    It's saying what Labour members - very many of them strong Corbyn supporters - is Labour's Brexit policy mess and NOT Watson's place in the Party (even those who rather dislike him).

    Meanwhile Corbyn and his lieutenants have been focussed on the factional battle, not the key policy question - the most important in recent political history.

    Do they?

    Usually when surveyed and asked specifically members would say they backed the current policy (at the time) whilst simultaneously Corbyn's opponents would scream at him that he was going against what Labour members want. The truth is Corbyn's opponents want Corbyn gone which the Labour members don't want, so the argument about this being on behalf of the members is plainly ridiculous.

    Labour policy will get decided at conference if there is disagreement by the members it will be changed, it was the members which set the Labour policy for the last year. There does seem to be, perhaps deliberate confusion between what people voted for in 2016, what they might like to happen in the end and what Labour members are actually happy with Labour policy being.

    A Labour member who voted remain and wanted a second referendum for a while and thinks remain would be the best option (me) would somehow be roped in as a Labour member supporting Watson over Corbyn. Which is clearly wrong. Labour members thinking remain is the best outcome should not be confused with supporting Watson or being angry at Labours current Brexit policy.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?


    It’s popular with some teachers....

    Not many parents..
  • eekeek Posts: 17,262
    DavidL said:
    It needs to be repeated as people forget..
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_P said:

    I saw the Tom Watson arrives at conference video and gets a good welcome but didn't pay much attention to it until I saw this tweet.


    It is ironic that Watson is being pilloried for advocating six months ago a policy that is now Labour Party policy, and strongly supported by the Shadow Chancellor*. In a more sane party that would be regarded as prophetic. It seems the Corbynites main objection is that the change didn't come from themselves.

    *Taking Labour anti-semitism seriously is Watsons other crime of course.
    Momentum are heavily remain, they don't dislike Watson because he is in favour of a referendum, McDonnell has been in favour of one as well and there are no moves to remove him.

    Watson is interested in fighting the leadership, this damages the party, removing his platform reduces the damage he can do.

    As someone who signed the 2nd referendum petition and the revoke petition (although the wording and timing was an important part of that) I want rid of Tom Watson because it makes it more likely we do get a 2nd referendum and avoid no deal. People don't dislike Watson because he wants a 2nd referendum, the vast majority of the party do, they dislike him because he harms the party and increases the chance of Conservative government.

    It is telling that many of Watsons fans (or those cheering him on in this circumstance) are those that do not wish Labour well. It is pretty obvious Labour members would not be part of that group.

    *TBH Lansman going for Watson is almost certainly anti semitism related.
    Yes, I carefully phrased my post. Momentum is pro-Remain, though the Corbynite Lexiteers take a different view.

    I am sure that you are right. "Not supporting the leader" is the Corbynite euphemism for tackling anti-semitism and entryism in the Labour Party.
    The people who want Watson gone probably consist more of remain supporters than leave supporters.

    If anything remain supporters have more on the line, do they really want to lose a second referendum to satisfy Watson's ego trip.

    You probably have a point, clearly Lansman attacked Watson as he didn't feel he was sufficiently anti semitic.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762
    edited September 2019
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ridge once again misses the chance to ask who would bum, man and pay for the border.

    Hopeless fawning.
    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.

    Watching from afar, it would be vaguely amusing to try and watch Junker construct a physical border against the wishes of everyone living both sides of it.
  • ydoethur said:

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?

    The problem with OFSTED is it isn't very good at school inspections. That's always been an issue depending on who was leading it. It was forensic under Wilshaw (which did not of course make him popular) while under Spielmann it's turned into a bunch of basic waffly sound bites that mean nothing, largely because she is incompetent and picks incompetent people to work for her. It's dropped almost as far as it did under Woodhead, who imposed vast workloads and unnecessary regulations and strictures to show he could, in revenge for having been driven out of the teaching professsion.

    Where I have very strong reservations about this policy is that I think once you burrow down to the detail the implication is it will be reformed rather than abolished. Most of its functions would go to LEAs. Well, LEAs are pretty well gutted out right now, but even when they were strong they were so corrupt and incompetent that nothing ever got changed except the size of administrators' salaries. So that would not be a positive step. And then this 'back stop' inspection team is just another name for OFSTED.

    Putting real reform in place would be tough because unfortunately there is no perfect way of inspecting schools. But this is Blairite style over substance - again. It would make matters worse, not better.
    OFSTED do a great job in writing honest and objective independent reports of school performance that can parents can rely upon.

    Labour and the Lib Dems don’t like them for similar but slightly different reasons.

    Labour hate them because the Corbynites hate choice and want to bring schools back under state control again. The Unions detest them too because such reports can influence things like performance related pay through highlighting which schools are failing, which affects their members.

    The Lib Dems don’t like them because lecturers and teachers traditionally form a large part of their activist base, who dress to the centre-left. They’re not too bothered about the ideology of state control of schools but think people like them should be calling the shots, and certainly don’t want to be held accountable for failure.

    As usual with making children the battleground in politics, pupils will be the losers.
  • TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ridge once again misses the chance to ask who would bum, man and pay for the border.

    Hopeless fawning.
    Not sure if that's an autocorrect for build the border or bomb the border.
  • On topic, I’ve had bad experiences with SPIN. You can win big but too often the spreads are too large (offering marginal value) and they suspend the market when you need it most, making it difficult to protect or capitalise on your position.

    I use Betfair exchange for at least 80% of my bets, because I have full control anytime anyplace.

    My other tip: only bet on what you know and understand. It’s far too easy to get impulsively sucked in by the sparkle of someone else’s tip, only to be left high and dry later when you realise you didn’t understand.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sandpit said:

    the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border

    Take back control of our borders...

    NOT THAT ONE !!!
  • TGOHF said:

    Why is getting rid of OFSTED a popular policy?

    Do people not want their schools inspected?


    It’s popular with some teachers....

    Not many parents..
    It’s not hard to figure out.

    They don’t want their failures revealed.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,890
    Sandpit said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ridge once again misses the chance to ask who would bum, man and pay for the border.

    Hopeless fawning.
    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.
    What makes you say that? That quote suggests to me that he is explaining to a UK audience (primarily) why the border is important to the EU. That suggests to me that he considers that the UK doesn’t care and feels the need to explain why the EU does.
  • TGOHF said:

    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.

    But if that's what you want, Ofsted is pretty illusory at giving it to you.
    Most schools get 1 day of inspection every three years or so, and all sorts of nasties (especially temporarily removing pupils from the school roll to massage the figures) went on for years, even under Wilshaw. Generating spreadsheets to impress inspectors is a huge drain of time and morality (cos they're Malcolm Tuckeresqe exercises in spin).

    If you want reliable frequent inspection, it's going to cost a lot more than Ofsted currently does.
  • TGOHF said:

    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.

    But if that's what you want, Ofsted is pretty illusory at giving it to you.
    Most schools get 1 day of inspection every three years or so, and all sorts of nasties (especially temporarily removing pupils from the school roll to massage the figures) went on for years, even under Wilshaw. Generating spreadsheets to impress inspectors is a huge drain of time and morality (cos they're Malcolm Tuckeresqe exercises in spin).

    If you want reliable frequent inspection, it's going to cost a lot more than Ofsted currently does.
    I look forward to seeing the policy proposals from Labour and the Liberal Democrats for more thorough and frequent inspections.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762
    Scott_P said:

    Sandpit said:

    the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border

    Take back control of our borders...

    NOT THAT ONE !!!
    Ha ha, replacing debate with sarcastic memes as usual.

    Taking back control means that it's up to us what we do at the border. If the EU wish to build a fence across Ireland, then all I'll say is good luck to them, and especially good luck finding anyone who actually wants to work at the border itself.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.

    But if that's what you want, Ofsted is pretty illusory at giving it to you.
    Most schools get 1 day of inspection every three years or so, and all sorts of nasties (especially temporarily removing pupils from the school roll to massage the figures) went on for years, even under Wilshaw. Generating spreadsheets to impress inspectors is a huge drain of time and morality (cos they're Malcolm Tuckeresqe exercises in spin).

    If you want reliable frequent inspection, it's going to cost a lot more than Ofsted currently does.
    You need SATs or exams to highlight value add.

    LDs and Lab want teachers and schools to avoid scrutiny- no thanks.

    See Scotland for an example of how things can go down the pan.
  • Mr. Royale, I never really followed any F1 team/driver, but when I started tipping (10 years ago now...) deliberately avoiding that sort of feeling, any trying to do likewise for antagonism too, was something I thought important.

    Emotions just get in the way.

    #dalekwisdom
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    Sandpit said:

    the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border

    Take back control of our borders...

    NOT THAT ONE !!!

    Choosing not to build a silly Brussels wall is taking back control.

    Build and pay for your own Emerald curtain Jean Claude..
  • Mr. Royale, I never really followed any F1 team/driver, but when I started tipping (10 years ago now...) deliberately avoiding that sort of feeling, any trying to do likewise for antagonism too, was something I thought important.

    Emotions just get in the way.

    #dalekwisdom

    That’s fine.

    Following my rule, though, I don’t understand F1 so I don’t bet on it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762
    DougSeal said:

    Sandpit said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:
    Ridge once again misses the chance to ask who would bum, man and pay for the border.

    Hopeless fawning.
    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.
    What makes you say that? That quote suggests to me that he is explaining to a UK audience (primarily) why the border is important to the EU. That suggests to me that he considers that the UK doesn’t care and feels the need to explain why the EU does.
    If it's so important to the EU, then he needs to be prepared to compromise elsewhere, in order to get a deal that's acceptable to all sides passed in short order. His rhetoric that the WA cannot be negotiated means that we are much more likely to see no deal come to pass - which is the one thing he says he doesn't want!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    DavidL said:

    I taught on the Diploma in Legal Practice for about 10 years teaching advocacy skills. The years I taught varied enormously in quality and motivation depending on a number of factors outwith my control such as how many had jobs at the end of the course. I suspect teachers would have similar problems and exam results would be a very crude way to assess them. Are teachers coping with additional need kids with English a second or third language really going to be compared with those coasting along in a "better" area with highly motivated parents giving support?

    This logic drives you down the path of trying to assess the value added by the teacher which in turn drives something like our current assessment regime. Given @ydoethur's reservations this seems not to work but exam results are not the answer either.

    Take your point. But, no, I don't mean compare exam results between different schools. As you say, that could be highly misleading. I mean compare exam results over time for the SAME school. This will show whether it is improving, deteriorating, treading water.

    Does the inspection regime deliver sufficient value over and above that to justify its size and bureaucracy and cost? If no, consider dismantling it.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,715
    edited September 2019
    Sandpit said:

    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.

    Isn't the whole point of the negotiation that they *do* know this? The EU side care about securing their border, and also one of their member states cares much more about protecting peace in NI than the London government does. They know that if they don't get proper legally-binding commitments from the UK, it will gradually diverge and increase the need for a border, then leave the EU either having to be the one that screws up the GFA, let its standards go unenforced or make a special status for the whole of Ireland and increasingly create a new border between Ireland and the EU. (The latter being what they UK side really wants, although it's too polite to say so.) Any of these is really bad for the EU.

    The EU knows they can't allow themselves to get salami-sliced like this, and that's why leveraging what London cares about, which is trade between the rest of the UK and the rest of the EU. Even if the UK decides to leave with No Deal, it still ends up coming back wanting a whole bunch of other things settled, and the EU is just going to say, "Legally-binding guarantees on the NI border or GTFO".
  • RogerRoger Posts: 15,223
    Listening to Marr Corbyn is a fool but Johnson is a knave. The Sunday Times are suggesting corruption when Mayor of London. Pumping public money (among other things) into his then concubine.

    Does no one care that our PM is corrupt?

    I'd take the fool any day .
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    kinabalu said:

    DavidL said:

    I taught on the Diploma in Legal Practice for about 10 years teaching advocacy skills. The years I taught varied enormously in quality and motivation depending on a number of factors outwith my control such as how many had jobs at the end of the course. I suspect teachers would have similar problems and exam results would be a very crude way to assess them. Are teachers coping with additional need kids with English a second or third language really going to be compared with those coasting along in a "better" area with highly motivated parents giving support?

    This logic drives you down the path of trying to assess the value added by the teacher which in turn drives something like our current assessment regime. Given @ydoethur's reservations this seems not to work but exam results are not the answer either.

    Take your point. But, no, I don't mean compare exam results between different schools. As you say, that could be highly misleading. I mean compare exam results over time for the SAME school. This will show whether it is improving, deteriorating, treading water.

    Does the inspection regime deliver sufficient value over and above that to justify its size and bureaucracy and cost? If no, consider dismantling it.
    You have just described the SATs system.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,661
    Scott_P said:

    Sandpit said:

    the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border

    Take back control of our borders...

    NOT THAT ONE !!!
    Indeed it is those pearl clutches most appalled at Labour members wanting open borders who seem most keen having an open, unguarded border on our only land border. One of the many Brexit paradoxes!
  • Mr. Royale, there are some quirks to F1. It's more prone to randomness than other sports. When Nadal plays Federer, you can be pretty sure neither will spontaneously combust. It's also unlikely that Djokovic will run into one of them at 200mph.

    F1: pre-race ramble, including a not very heroic tip:
    https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/09/singapore-pre-race-2019.html
  • RogerRoger Posts: 15,223
    edited September 2019
    Corbyn n Marr. He's committing Hari Kiri....

    Help!!!
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 6,119
    Just in case Labour have not noticed, they are running (with the help of Kirsty Williams) the educational system in Wales.

    They have been running it for 20 years. Enough time to make a real difference, one might think. An entire generation of school kids have been raised with Welsh Labour running their education.

    Maybe if Labour had made an abundant success of Welsh education, I would be more optimistic about their plans for England.

    In fact, Wales has always scored worse than England, Scotland & N Ireland in all PISA tests.

    E.g., Science from Pisa in 2016:

    13 England, 19 ROI, 23 NI, 24 Scotland, 34 Wales.

    Of course these tables are not everything, but the picture is clear. England are ahead, RoI, Ni and Scotland bunched together behind England .... and then Wales last.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    JonWC said:

    DavidL said:

    I think that there are several problems with betting on currency exchanges to any material degree. F
    Thirdly, this is not an unrigged market. So again if no deal came to pass it is very likely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Whether it would be effective is hard to predict but an increase in interest rates, for example, may cause the market to move in unexpected ways. This is not a level playing field with a disinterested umpire.


    I am sure that there are many other factors, IANAE, but playing with foreign exchange looks somewhat pointless, risky and a game where you are the mug taking on professionals.

    It is very unlikely that the BoE would intervene in a serious way. Firstly the BoE only intervenes for monetary policy reasons on it own account. Second if intervening on behalf of the government (i.e. Sajid Javid giving the order) it doesn't have the reserves for serious intervention. They might try a few billion quid (as a take profit) but this would probably panic the market more in the medium term as they assumed policy makers have lost the plot. UK reserves expressed as import cover are very very low.
    There are a variety of instruments open to the Bank. They are not restricted to their reserves. Interest rates is one example but so is the equivalent of QE such as the Draghi punt did for various EZ bonds that were going down the toilet. As I say such steps may not be successful or wise but that doesn't mean that they would not happen.
    Jacking up interest rates would send UK asset markets into meltdown - no way are they going to do that to a sufficient extent to influence the currency, it would probably have the opposite effect. Not quite sure what you mean by QE - buying even more government bonds injects cash into the market and drives the currency down, not up.
    Given that QE has happened on large scale and the bonds purchased are still on the BoE balance sheet, an alternative to interest rate rises is presumably to reverse it to some extent. Basically sell some of the bonds held on the open market, and then effectively burn the money received for them and reduce the size of the balance sheet. Thereby reducing the money supply. The literal opposite of the original QE, the ability to do so marking the distinction between QE and “printing money”.

    Would “cost” the Govt a bit of money though due to their “clever wheeze” of banking the interest paid on the bonds for the Treasury. They would suddenly have to start actually paying real interest on the debt!

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 25,968

    TGOHF said:

    kinabalu said:

    @ydoethur

    What about moving away from inspections and 'grading' of schools?

    Focus instead on quality control of key inputs - the curriculum, hiring, pay & conditions etc - and then trust the staff to do the job.

    Exam results (year on year comparison) can be a benchmark. No need for an inspection regime on top of that. So dismantle it.

    Do you think?

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp.

    But if that's what you want, Ofsted is pretty illusory at giving it to you.
    Most schools get 1 day of inspection every three years or so, and all sorts of nasties (especially temporarily removing pupils from the school roll to massage the figures) went on for years, even under Wilshaw. Generating spreadsheets to impress inspectors is a huge drain of time and morality (cos they're Malcolm Tuckeresqe exercises in spin).

    If you want reliable frequent inspection, it's going to cost a lot more than Ofsted currently does.
    I look forward to seeing the policy proposals from Labour and the Liberal Democrats for more thorough and frequent inspections.
    Every so often universities offer Masters degrees in Inspection and Regulation. When I was seconded to one of the predecessors of the CQC (for Care Homes) we were advised to try, if possible to form a good working relationship with the homes which we were inspecting. We were there to ensure standards were achieved and maintained, not try and 'catch people out'. We also visited the same home for a few years, at about 6 monthly intervals, which meant that we could try and develop a positive relationship.
    Of course we sometimes found things that had gone wrong, but the object wasn't punitive, but positive.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 14,639
    Roger said:

    Listening to Marr Corbyn is a fool but Johnson is a knave. The Sunday Times are suggesting corruption when Mayor of London. Pumping public money (among other things) into his then concubine.

    Does no one care that our PM is corrupt?

    I'd take the fool any day .

    What's the difference between a fool and a knave?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,828
    Andy_JS said:

    Roger said:

    Listening to Marr Corbyn is a fool but Johnson is a knave. The Sunday Times are suggesting corruption when Mayor of London. Pumping public money (among other things) into his then concubine.

    Does no one care that our PM is corrupt?

    I'd take the fool any day .

    What's the difference between a fool and a knave?
    One's Pinky and one is the Brain.

    You might need to be under 40 for the reference....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 35,762

    Sandpit said:

    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.

    Isn't the whole point of the negotiation that they *do* know this? The EU side care about securing their border, and also one of their member states cares much more about protecting peace in NI than the London government does. They know that if they don't get proper legally-binding commitments from the UK, it will gradually diverge and increase the need for a border, then leave the EU either having to be the one that screws up the GFA, let its standards go unenforced or make a special status for the whole of Ireland and increasingly create a new border between Ireland and the EU. (The latter being what they UK side really wants, although it's too polite to say so.) Any of these is really bad for the EU.

    The EU knows they can't allow themselves to get salami-sliced like this, and that's why leveraging what London cares about, which is trade between the rest of the UK and the rest of the EU. Even if the UK decides to leave with No Deal, it still ends up coming back wanting a whole bunch of other things settled, and the EU is just going to say, "Legally-binding guarantees on the NI border or GTFO".
    The problem is that Junker's attitude and rhetoric is most likely to lead to what he says he doesn't want - no deal.

    If his issue is with agricultural inspections, then let's agree that UK and RoI can station inspectors on the 'other' side of the border, checking shipments as they leave the originating farm.

    The way the 'backstop' is designed, is to prevent the UK diverging in regulation *in anything* from the EU, preventing the UK signing trade deals with other countries and to allow the EU to have the upper hand in negotiations in the next stage, which they intend to drag on for as long as possible. Ireland, and the willing Varadkar, have been allowed to be used as pawns for the greater good of the EU Project, at considerable risk to their own economy. Junker is betting his life (and that of Varakdar) that the UK blinks first.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 15,223
    Andy_JS said:

    Roger said:

    Listening to Marr Corbyn is a fool but Johnson is a knave. The Sunday Times are suggesting corruption when Mayor of London. Pumping public money (among other things) into his then concubine.

    Does no one care that our PM is corrupt?

    I'd take the fool any day .

    What's the difference between a fool and a knave?
    A knave knows what he's doing
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited September 2019
    Labour’s school inspection policy seems to be to let local authorities run periodic “checks” and flag problems by exception to “trained” inspectors. Can’t see any conflicts of political interest there, no sirree...

    I can think a lot of local authorities would miraculously find that there aren’t any problems with their schools, and simply explain away any indicators such as poor exam results as consequences of low govt funding and/or the particular characteristics of their local areas.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,823

    Dan Hodges has noticed that Johnson has backed himself into a corner.

    https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1175646068589170688?s=21

    I share Dan Hodges' view that Over the past week it has become increasingly hard to discern what strategy Boris is actually pursuing.

    Not just the past week, come to that. And especially not the part that needed the EU not to read British newspapers where Boris had explained he was bluffing.

    One thing that was clear was that Boris was desperate for a snap general election before Brexit, before its adverse consequences became apparent to voters.

    Beyond that, who knows? I am not sure Boris, Dominic Cummings (and presumably Lynton Crosby) have the same hymn sheet.

    Boris needs a Jeremy Corbyn-led, minority Labour government for a couple of weeks to revoke or extend Article 50, then call the election which Boris can then fight as the champion of the people against the Establishment because right now, the millionaire, Old Etonian, Oxford-educated prime minister is the Establishment, and worse, he'd have lied to the people.
    Dan Hodges' personal journey has been quite extraordinary. He was a very active Blairite (his self-description) up to 2013, but now writes things like "some Eurocrats clearly have little concern for how many Spanish manchego producers must be sacrificed on the altar of a glorious EU super-state". I'm never critical of people for changing their views over time - we're all entitled to - but he's now apparently lining up with the hard Brexiteer wing of the Tories.
  • Just in case Labour have not noticed, they are running (with the help of Kirsty Williams) the educational system in Wales.

    They have been running it for 20 years. Enough time to make a real difference, one might think. An entire generation of school kids have been raised with Welsh Labour running their education.

    Maybe if Labour had made an abundant success of Welsh education, I would be more optimistic about their plans for England.

    In fact, Wales has always scored worse than England, Scotland & N Ireland in all PISA tests.

    E.g., Science from Pisa in 2016:

    13 England, 19 ROI, 23 NI, 24 Scotland, 34 Wales.

    Of course these tables are not everything, but the picture is clear. England are ahead, RoI, Ni and Scotland bunched together behind England .... and then Wales last.

    Yes but this was still true when Labour was also running England and Scotland which rather implies there are other factors responsible for the difference.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,408
    TGOHF said:

    Oh good grief - Schools are not for the benefit of teachers or LEAs

    Parents want results and evidence that the teaching is up to standard. And regularly.

    Not to send them off to some voyage of lefty discovery hippy camp

    You have a jaundiced view of teachers. With quality control on recruitment and training, then trusted to do the job they are paid to do, I doubt that they would systematically turn schools into happy clappy anarcho-syndicalist communes.

    And if at the occasional school they did, it would show up in exam results.

    Exam results (for the same school over time) give a measure of how a school is doing. Do we need a bulky inspection bureaucracy over and above that? Not sure we do.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,659
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    It also shows that the border in Ireland is entirely an EU problem - it's not yet dawned on Junker and co that the UK doesn't care at all about having a perfectly policed border, as it doesn't at the moment with regard to duties and illegal goods crossing.

    Isn't the whole point of the negotiation that they *do* know this? The EU side care about securing their border, and also one of their member states cares much more about protecting peace in NI than the London government does. They know that if they don't get proper legally-binding commitments from the UK, it will gradually diverge and increase the need for a border, then leave the EU either having to be the one that screws up the GFA, let its standards go unenforced or make a special status for the whole of Ireland and increasingly create a new border between Ireland and the EU. (The latter being what they UK side really wants, although it's too polite to say so.) Any of these is really bad for the EU.

    The EU knows they can't allow themselves to get salami-sliced like this, and that's why leveraging what London cares about, which is trade between the rest of the UK and the rest of the EU. Even if the UK decides to leave with No Deal, it still ends up coming back wanting a whole bunch of other things settled, and the EU is just going to say, "Legally-binding guarantees on the NI border or GTFO".
    The problem is that Junker's attitude and rhetoric is most likely to lead to what he says he doesn't want - no deal.

    If his issue is with agricultural inspections, then let's agree that UK and RoI can station inspectors on the 'other' side of the border, checking shipments as they leave the originating farm.

    The way the 'backstop' is designed, is to prevent the UK diverging in regulation *in anything* from the EU, preventing the UK signing trade deals with other countries and to allow the EU to have the upper hand in negotiations in the next stage, which they intend to drag on for as long as possible. Ireland, and the willing Varadkar, have been allowed to be used as pawns for the greater good of the EU Project, at considerable risk to their own economy. Junker is betting his life (and that of Varakdar) that the UK blinks first.
    The backstop has always had the problem that it rewards the EU acting in bad faith at the next stage of negotitions. Which is why it should NEVER have been given the time of day.
This discussion has been closed.