I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
Everyone should be free to work the hours they choose on the days they choose (subject to safety limits where applicable). The government should incentivise companies and employees to have a good work/life balance.
I think the UK's debt fueled consumption economic model is certain to lead to disaster and that we need a system shock and alternative thinking to shift it to something more sustainable.
Whilst a Remain win would have locked in that economic model almost permanently.
Snip
With the four day week as with so many things we are asking the wrong questions.
Should we ban five day weeks (or six or seven day weeks)? Not at all.
Should the government work to help those business and employees who prefer doing a four day week? Are there things the government can help with to achieve this? Absolutely yes to both those questions.
There is so much time wasted in business that the four-day week makes sense. More energy for employees; fewer pointless meetings; clearer focus; enhanced productivity.
The leisure sector would also benefit from longer weekends - doubling customers’ ‘whole days away’ from one (Saturday only) to two (Friday and Saturday).
I'm confused. What about Sunday?
Not a ‘whole day away’, used for travelling home and therefore nothing like as revenue-friendly for the hospitality sector. That wouldn’t change under a four day week. However you would get two ‘whole days away’ (Fri and Sat) vs just one now.
But the hospitality sector will also have that day off won’t they? Likewise the trains and buses.
Er no. Do they already have weekends off? No.
But this is an extra day for all.
You really aren’t grasping this are you? How many days do you think people in hospitality jobs work currently?
I have no idea. I don’t even know if there is one. I’m just posing the question. It’s worth thinking about. I have never understood why society getting more technologically advanced should result in more days at work. The trend over history is to work fewer days. And rightly so, I doubt many people on their death beds wish they’d spent more days at the office and fewer with their families and friends.
I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
Everyone should be free to work the hours they choose on the days they choose (subject to safety limits where applicable). The government should incentivise companies and employees to have a good work/life balance.
Of course but you need some guidance, hence the cultural acceptance that Saturday and Sunday are weekends for office staff. Adding Friday isn’t a bad idea: I feel we’d be more productive.
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
Sigh...
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times?
(I am on a train. I hate trains)
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
There does have to be a point beyond which the standard working week cannot be reduced though. I just don't know where that point is.
Agree. I just don’t think we are there yet, hence my support for a rethink. I think the working week is probably about a day too long.
I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
Everyone should be free to work the hours they choose on the days they choose (subject to safety limits where applicable). The government should incentivise companies and employees to have a good work/life balance.
Of course but you need some guidance, hence the cultural acceptance that Saturday and Sunday are weekends for office staff. Adding Friday isn’t a bad idea: I feel we’d be more productive.
We dont need guidance, guidance is actually bad! Too many people commute to arrive at 8 or 9 because that is the guidance, for a lot of companies it would make little difference if they arrived at 7 or 1 instead as long as they did the hours and got the work done. The commutes would then be cheaper, more comfortable and quicker.
Let the working week become more diverse and flexible, we dont need government guidance.
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
Sigh...
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times?
(I am on a train. I hate trains)
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
Plenty of economists in 2006 were predicting a massive housing crash in America.
Some certainly. I'm not sure many established economists did so, and if I was a young economist I'd chance my arm on pretty much anything.
It must have been a fair number of fairly mainstream ones as I was confidentially telling my American office mate that his bullishness about the American economy was misplaced as the numbers were soft and based on a huge housing bubble that was showing signs of being at its peak and ready to pop.
I'm not big into economic forecasts so it must have been fairly mainstream as a thought by then for me to get it.
Certainly criticism of the rating of CDOs was prevalent in 2006 and the problems that would bring.
I think there were some economists who were predicting disaster continuously since the dust settled from the bursting of the dotcom boom. So certainly the idea was out there, but without a prediction of when it would go south that had any skill it made it hard to react to. What's the saying, "the market can stay irrational for longer then you can stay solvent."
It's the same with the next downturn. There have been economists warning that the response to the Great Financial Crash did nothing to solve the fundamental problems and is storing up problems for the next crash, but I think none of them would have been surprised if it had fallen apart in 2013, and here we are in 2019 and it's possible that the wheels have already fallen off and we are continuing only with our momentum, but how certain can we be of this, and would it have been accurately predicted a year ago?
I have no idea. I don’t even know if there is one. I’m just posing the question. It’s worth thinking about. I have never understood why society getting more technologically advanced should result in more days at work. The trend over history is to work fewer days. And rightly so, I doubt many people on their death beds wish they’d spent more days at the office and fewer with their families and friends.
In that case, I suspect that it will happen organically with people working flexible hours or part-time (I work part-time for instance, as do a significant number of the staff at my school). Having everything shut down for an extra day seems excessive though - in fact if we are to become more productive and use fewer resources for the same output then we need to be able to use the facilities we have for more of the time. I can see people working a four day week in the future, or even less for some, but I would be surprised if the economy did.
From my own experience, Wednesday is the best day off anyway, not Friday.
£70 billion per year by 2029, I believe there would be a compounding effect of diminished growth, so probably only a few tens of billions of quid per year initially.
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
Sigh...
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times?
(I am on a train. I hate trains)
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
Everyone should be free to work the hours they choose on the days they choose (subject to safety limits where applicable). The government should incentivise companies and employees to have a good work/life balance.
Of course but you need some guidance, hence the cultural acceptance that Saturday and Sunday are weekends for office staff. Adding Friday isn’t a bad idea: I feel we’d be more productive.
We dont need guidance, guidance is actually bad! Too many people commute to arrive at 8 or 9 because that is the guidance, for a lot of companies it would make little difference if they arrived at 7 or 1 instead as long as they did the hours and got the work done. The commutes would then be cheaper, more comfortable and quicker.
Let the working week become more diverse and flexible, we dont need government guidance.
I have some sympathy with that view, certainly the spirit of it. In which case there would be no need for mandated hours at all (and, philosophically, that is indeed the case in many professions).
The danger is though, that many people would be then pressured into working more, and mothers etc would be even more under pressure than now. Witness what has happened when people are given unlimited holidays: they often end up taking fewer than when they were given an annual allocation.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
I suspect the arguments against moving from a six day week to a five and a half day week, and then to a five day week, were similar if not the same as moving from a five day week to a four. Spurious. Thin. There is nothing in the laws of physics that says Friday has to be a working day.
Everyone should be free to work the hours they choose on the days they choose (subject to safety limits where applicable). The government should incentivise companies and employees to have a good work/life balance.
Of course but you need some guidance, hence the cultural acceptance that Saturday and Sunday are weekends for office staff. Adding Friday isn’t a bad idea: I feel we’d be more productive.
We dont need guidance, guidance is actually bad! Too many people commute to arrive at 8 or 9 because that is the guidance, for a lot of companies it would make little difference if they arrived at 7 or 1 instead as long as they did the hours and got the work done. The commutes would then be cheaper, more comfortable and quicker.
Let the working week become more diverse and flexible, we dont need government guidance.
I have some sympathy with that view, certainly the spirit of it. In which case there would be no need for mandated hours at all (and, philosophically, that is indeed the case in many professions).
The danger is though, that many people would be then pressured into working more, and mothers etc would be even more under pressure than now. Witness what has happened when people are given unlimited holidays: they often end up taking fewer than when they were given an annual allocation.
That is why I say the role of the state is to incentivise flexible working, not direct how and when we should work.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
Sigh...
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times?
(I am on a train. I hate trains)
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
But R is doing well in academia! I think?
S-plus (although that's pretty well obsolete now)
R is used primarily by statisticians, but people who do modelling or machine learning tend to use Python. As both are free people gravitate towards those with the greatest range of techniques, so Python is doing well and - surprisingly - R, which was the Next Big Thing, is now seen as unhip and declining in popularity.
I have no idea. I don’t even know if there is one. I’m just posing the question. It’s worth thinking about. I have never understood why society getting more technologically advanced should result in more days at work. The trend over history is to work fewer days. And rightly so, I doubt many people on their death beds wish they’d spent more days at the office and fewer with their families and friends.
In that case, I suspect that it will happen organically with people working flexible hours or part-time (I work part-time for instance, as do a significant number of the staff at my school). Having everything shut down for an extra day seems excessive though - in fact if we are to become more productive and use fewer resources for the same output then we need to be able to use the facilities we have for more of the time. I can see people working a four day week in the future, or even less for some, but I would be surprised if the economy did.
From my own experience, Wednesday is the best day off anyway, not Friday.
Actually I agree about the Wednesday point. But, I think businesses prefer weekends in blocks. There is only one country in the whole world which has a split weekend...
lol. £70bn per year by 2029 means £700bn a year total, which is a third of our entire economy.
In other words, Brexit is going to be significantly worse than the First World War.
Its not a reduction, it’s forgone growth (the country will have a lower GDP than it otherwise might). Part of the effect is that we won’t grow as much if there are fewer immigrants and the population is smaller.
I know. It's voodoo statistics for silly people. Idiots think it means actual loss to the economy: negative growth. Not opportunity cost.
Even on the basis you describe, it's nonsense. It does not factor in what the UK might do to boost growth in the face of this, because that cannot be predicted or determined. So it's almost entirely useless, just like the Project Fear bollocks which predicted an immediate recession after the Brexit vote, but got it wholly wrong because the Treasury and the BoE got proactive to prevent a recession.
The Project Fear boffins hadn't factored that in. Genius.
All these stats from both sides are gibberish. The post Brexit future is essentially unknowable.
What would an international male model know about macro economic forecasting? What would a writer of airport novels know about it either, come to that?
I do male ECONOMIC modelling.
Sigh...
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times?
(I am on a train. I hate trains)
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. SPSS, um... 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? I would build a model in Fortran, but that's because when I hear "model" I think of partial differential equations, which is probably not what you are thinking of. 3) Why is python thriving and R not? It's a lot easier to share and re-use code in Python than in R. Also, scientists use Python. Also the graphical plotting in Python is prettier by default than in R. 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? I'm afraid I don't recall (but I'm suitably wary of both). 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? I could guess, but that would be silly. 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments Don't know 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? A proper treatment of uncertainty is required, but often neglected. 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? If I understand the question correctly then I would say a Gaussian distribution. 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? I would have thought Poisson. 14) what is the distribution of bus times? Poisson. I'm sure there's a good song that could be written about it. Interestingly the distribution of rainfall is also poisson. (I am on a train. I hate trains)
I have no idea. I don’t even know if there is one. I’m just posing the question. It’s worth thinking about. I have never understood why society getting more technologically advanced should result in more days at work. The trend over history is to work fewer days. And rightly so, I doubt many people on their death beds wish they’d spent more days at the office and fewer with their families and friends.
In that case, I suspect that it will happen organically with people working flexible hours or part-time (I work part-time for instance, as do a significant number of the staff at my school). Having everything shut down for an extra day seems excessive though - in fact if we are to become more productive and use fewer resources for the same output then we need to be able to use the facilities we have for more of the time. I can see people working a four day week in the future, or even less for some, but I would be surprised if the economy did.
From my own experience, Wednesday is the best day off anyway, not Friday.
Actually I agree about the Wednesday point. But, I think businesses prefer weekends in blocks. There is only one country in the whole world which has a split weekend...
PB quiz... (no googling)
The thing is I don’t expect everybody to take the same day off. If we did then we would need 25% more of everything than we would if people worked for 80% of the time spread round a five day working week.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
Barnesian FPT Your model for St Albans has LD 37,000, Con 22,000 Labour 0 I know there will be tactical voting, but is there a bug somewhere ?
@PaulM Sorry for the delay. Just back from trick and treating.
The UNS assumption (take the national swing off the share in every constituency) leads to negative shares when the original share is small. I have set negative shares to zero. It's not a bug. It is an unrealistic assumption of UNS which most people and models seem to use. I try to mitigate it with the part use of a multiplicative model but that has its own problems with large shares.
The problem isn't with the tactical voting assumptions. It doesn't assume all Labour voters in St Albans tactically vote LD! It has over estimated the underlying shift against Labour because the Labour share was so small to start with.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
First, nobody is saying they are "going to cancel democracy". I appreciate you are interpreting having another referendum as cancelling democracy but it simply isn't. At worst it could be classed as ignoring the voters wishes, although if voters wish it that much a binding 2nd ref would allow those wishes to be fulfilled.
Secondly, most voters are are not "very very very angry". Only a very few are outraged. No one has any excuse for making voilent threats.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
I assume it must be a spoof: not even the Lib Dems would do this would they?
It is aggressive sure, but what actually is so wrong about it? They are making the point that only the LDs can challenge which is what the numbers suggest. If Labour want to pay for a similar question to be asked they can but I doubt the numbers would be there for them.
I have a bigger issue with the newspapers and even BBC using biased and misleading questions for media reporting than politicians or companies advertising.
Labour has a higher vote floor in many seats but they also have a lower vote ceiling, which is a key concept in identifying who is best placed to stand any chance of beating the Tories.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
If these rats seats are retaken by the Tories at the election on result night that's a Tory Hold isn't it? While if they hold onto their seat it will be a Lib Dem Gain won't it?
I assume it must be a spoof: not even the Lib Dems would do this would they?
It is aggressive sure, but what actually is so wrong about it? They are making the point that only the LDs can challenge which is what the numbers suggest. If Labour want to pay for a similar question to be asked they can but I doubt the numbers would be there for them.
I have a bigger issue with the newspapers and even BBC using biased and misleading questions for media reporting than politicians or companies advertising.
Did you read the small print? It says that even if everyone who possibly might vote LD did then they would still lose.
If these rats seats are retaken by the Tories at the election on result night that's a Tory Hold isn't it? While if they hold onto their seat it will be a Lib Dem Gain won't it?
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
First, nobody is saying they are "going to cancel democracy". I appreciate you are interpreting having another referendum as cancelling democracy but it simply isn't. At worst it could be classed as ignoring the voters wishes, although if voters wish it that much a binding 2nd ref would allow those wishes to be fulfilled.
Secondly, most voters are are not "very very very angry". Only a very few are outraged. No one has any excuse for making voilent threats.
No. Soubry has gone beyond calling for another referendum, she has several times called for Revoke. That is the very definition of cancelling democracy. It literally means overturning a vote you don't like.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
What effect does a significant number of ex-Tories joining the Lib Dem’s have on the willingness of Labour voters to vote tactically for them? I’m not sure it helps.
It should make it easier for those who have voted Tory before to switch though.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
What effect does a significant number of ex-Tories joining the Lib Dem’s have on the willingness of Labour voters to vote tactically for them? I’m not sure it helps.
It should make it easier for those who have voted Tory before to switch though.
Time was that Tories would defect to the Labour Party if they decided they no longer felt comfortable with the blue party. I know it's not surprising, but it is notable that so many MPs have left the Conservatives and none of them have joined the official opposition.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
What effect does a significant number of ex-Tories joining the Lib Dem’s have on the willingness of Labour voters to vote tactically for them? I’m not sure it helps.
It should make it easier for those who have voted Tory before to switch though.
I'm not sure it matters. The voting pool the Lib Dems need to target are soft Tories who don't want to vote for a Farage/Johnson Blukip party.
Talking of amusing spin from political parties, if you want a good cynical laugh take a gander at the website of the Runnymede and Weybridge Conservatives. It's like something out of the Soviet Union under Stalin: every single mention of he-who-shall-not-be-named-but-who-until-last-month-was-their-distinguished-Tory-MP-and-Cabinet-minister has been ruthlessly airbrushed out of existence:
For my part, this is the acid test. Given the belated conversion of Boris to avoiding crashing out in chaos, I could consider voting Conservative again, especially since the LibDems are pretty dire. But there is no way I'll vote for a party which hasn't got room for Phil Hammond, David Gauke etc, and which indeed is waging some kind of vindictive vendetta against them, and for that matter against Amber Rudd who doesn't even want to stand again.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
When did she say she would cancel democracy? Quote, date, place please.
1) name four popular statistical software packages beginning with S. 2) if you are building a model in python, what technique would you be most likely to use? 3) Why is python thriving and R not? It's a lot easier to share and re-use code in Python than in R. Also, scientists use Python. Also the graphical plotting in Python is prettier by default than in R. 4) when is a generalised linear model preferable to linear regression? 5) what is the difference between linear and logistic regression? 6) name a modelling package used in financial departments 7) name a modelling package used in actuarial departments 8) name a modelling package used in a statistical department 9) how would you prevent overfitting? 10) describe forward and backward selection 11) why is item response theory preferable to classic test theory when measuring opinions about extreme events? 12) what distribution would you use to model the frequency of an event? 13) what distribution would you use to model the severity of an event? 14) what is the distribution of bus times? Poisson. I'm sure there's a good song that could be written about it. Interestingly the distribution of rainfall is also poisson.
1) SAS, Stata, SPSS, S-plus, SciPy... 2) the one I see most often is extreme gradient boosting, or XGBoost. Apols if wrong 3) yep, I'd go with that. 4) linear regression models one function and is sensitive to normality - if the residuals are non-normal you have to transform your variables. GLMs have two functions (error and link functions) which removes the necessity for normality 5) linear regression is for continuous variables, logistic regression is for categorical variables. 6) Prophet? (Now obsolete?) 7) Emblem 8) SAS (office and medical statistics), though I think agricultural and field workers used to have a Stata bias. 9) fit your chosen variables one-by-one and plot the variance on a graph. The curve is steep at the beginning but levels off. When it starts levelling off stop fitting. 10) forward selection is when you start of with no variables fitted and progressively add them, backward selection is when you fit all the variables and progressively remove them 11) item response theory has a detection curve that is s-shaped, which allows it to distinguish fine differences at the extremes. 12) and 13) I'd've gone with Poisson for frequency and gamma for severity, but happy to be contradicted 14) YES! Which is why you always have to wait for a bus, regardless of when you arrive at the bus stop...
The relentless Labour emphasis on the NHS not working well on QT. If this is all that Labour has they are in trouble. They are going to bore voters to death.
Eddisbury. Stayed Conservative in the 1997 landslide. High point for the Liberal Democrats of just over 10k seats in 2010, but they barely saved their deposit in 2017. Estimated at 52.2% Leave.
I guess we get to see a sense of Sandbach's personal vote.
Talking of amusing spin from political parties, if you want a good cynical laugh take a gander at the website of the Runnymede and Weybridge Conservatives. It's like something out of the Soviet Union under Stalin: every single mention of he-who-shall-not-be-named-but-who-until-last-month-was-their-distinguished-Tory-MP-and-Cabinet-minister has been ruthlessly airbrushed out of existence:
For my part, this is the acid test. Given the belated conversion of Boris to avoiding crashing out in chaos, I could consider voting Conservative again, especially since the LibDems are pretty dire. But there is no way I'll vote for a party which hasn't got room for Phil Hammond, David Gauke etc, and which indeed is waging some kind of vindictive vendetta against them, and for that matter against Amber Rudd who doesn't even want to stand again.
Gauke and Rudd maybe you have a point, but Hammond has relentlessly attacked the Tories, you cannot seriously expect them to readmit him.
The relentless Labour emphasis on the NHS not working well on QT. If this is all that Labour has they are in trouble. They are going to bore voters to death.
Oooh, Labour guy being booed!
If Labour are saying the same things as 2017 they need to be careful. Lots of people gave them the benefit of the doubt and voted for them then. Since then we have had
- almost all Jewish Labour Mps have left - Being investigated for antisemtism - Corbyn has shown the leadership of a wet lettuce dealing with it - Incoherent Brexit policy - you can and regularly do get two senior figures saying different things on the same day - Blocked almost all options for Brexit - May deal was basically what they wanted but they wouldn’t vote for a bad Tory Brexit only a good Labour Brexit
I’m sure there are lots of other things but it’s not as likely to give you a warm morally superior glow now
I find the Picanninies comment to have been mocking the mindset of British officials visiting Africa rather than stating his own views. And he has apologised for it. The pillar box comments were crass but were describing the most misogynistic clothing. It was not vilifying Muslims as a whole.
I'm Jewish, though non-practising, and a former national executive member of Labour Friends of Israel. I think you are applying different criteria to the party leader you prefer. Corbyn absolutely hasn't vilified Jews (as a whole or in part) and your interpretation of the picaninnies comment is, well, generous to a fault.
.
It's not close though, is it? 83% of Jews do think Corbyn is personally Antisemitic. A greater number believe Labour tolerates higher levels of Antisemitism than any other party. Even if Corbyn hasn't "vilified Jews as a whole", he has laid wreaths for those who planned their murders, honoured those who wish a genocide against them as friends, and hosted in Parliament those who believe their bread is baked with the blood of gentiles.
The unluckiest anti-racist in England, as he's known.
Your statement about who he laid Wreaths for is untrue.
Corbyn did indeed attend a wreath-lying ceremony in 2014 where victims of the 1985 Israeli airstrike against the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organisation in Tunis were remembered – an attack that had been condemned at the time by the UN and by Margaret Thatcher. The attack killed around 50 people, mostly Palestinians, and injured many more.
While wreaths may also have been laid at other graves, Corbyn did not participate in these ceremonies. Nor are any of the graves those of Munich perpetrators, who are mostly buried in Libya. None is buried in Tunis.
My statement is not untrue. Yours is, and was rapidly debunked when the Milne-machine tried to run it at the me.
It has been verified by people attending the site, and through clear photographic evidence, that the graves n which Corbyn laid the wreath are those of the leadership of Black September - the planners, funders, and instigators, of the kidnap, castration, and murder of Jewish civilians. You will note I said planners, not perpetrators. You are correct that the hired muscle who did the deed are buried elsewhere.
The wreath-layingng ceremony for the bombing was indeed held, during the same conference. It was held elsewhere, because that memorial is elsewhere. There are photos of that ceremony too, in which Corbyn can be seen at the back of a large group, not holding a wreath. The wreath he laid was for the leaders of the terror gang, not the broader PLO.
Gauke and Rudd maybe you have a point, but Hammond has relentlessly attacked the Tories, you cannot seriously expect them to readmit him.
He has been massively more loyal to the party than the current PM or Leader of the House, and it seems that his one and only red line - not crashing out in chaos - was shared after all by Boris, once he'd actually bothered to inform himself of what a disaster No Deal would have been.
The relentless Labour emphasis on the NHS not working well on QT. If this is all that Labour has they are in trouble. They are going to bore voters to death.
Oooh, Labour guy being booed!
If Labour are saying the same things as 2017 they need to be careful. Lots of people gave them the benefit of the doubt and voted for them then. Since then we have had
- almost all Jewish Labour Mps have left - Being investigated for antisemtism - Corbyn has shown the leadership of a wet lettuce dealing with it - Incoherent Brexit policy - you can and regularly do get two senior figures saying different things on the same day - Blocked almost all options for Brexit - May deal was basically what they wanted but they wouldn’t vote for a bad Tory Brexit only a good Labour Brexit
I’m sure there are lots of other things but it’s not as likely to give you a warm morally superior glow now
The booing of a Labour MP talking about the NHS is entirely new. And intriguing. It does imply there is limited mileage here. If that is the case, what ELSE will Labour talk about?
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
First, nobody is saying they are "going to cancel democracy". I appreciate you are interpreting having another referendum as cancelling democracy but it simply isn't. At worst it could be classed as ignoring the voters wishes, although if voters wish it that much a binding 2nd ref would allow those wishes to be fulfilled.
Secondly, most voters are are not "very very very angry". Only a very few are outraged. No one has any excuse for making voilent threats.
No. Soubry has gone beyond calling for another referendum, she has several times called for Revoke. That is the very definition of cancelling democracy. It literally means overturning a vote you don't like.
Over a hundred tory MPs voted against the Scotland Act to establish the Scottish Parliament. After a referendum that was won by a margin of 49 percentage points.
Were they cancelling democracy? Would they have been justifiable targets for very, very, very angry people?
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
I am liking these defectors standing for new parties or as independents. I'm a lot more comfortable with people doing so than others, and it'll be fun to see how many, if any, can stick around, especially where standing in their current seats. I noticed one of the MPs who stood as an Indy against Trudeau got in.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
First, nobody is saying they are "going to cancel democracy". I appreciate you are interpreting having another referendum as cancelling democracy but it simply isn't. At worst it could be classed as ignoring the voters wishes, although if voters wish it that much a binding 2nd ref would allow those wishes to be fulfilled.
Secondly, most voters are are not "very very very angry". Only a very few are outraged. No one has any excuse for making voilent threats.
No. Soubry has gone beyond calling for another referendum, she has several times called for Revoke. That is the very definition of cancelling democracy. It literally means overturning a vote you don't like.
Over a hundred tory MPs voted against the Scotland Act to establish the Scottish Parliament. After a referendum that was won by a margin of 49 percentage points.
Were they cancelling democracy? Would they have been justifiable targets for very, very, very angry people?
Many of them are still in parliament today.
Let's switch this around. Imagine that you won the Scottish indy referendum. Imagine YES was victorious.
Now imagine that a NO dominated Scottish parliament had, since that vote, apparently conspired to prevent independence being enacted, and that several prominent Scottish Tories had demanded that the YES vote be simply annulled, and revoked, so that Scotland could return to its place in the UK.
What do you think would happen to those bold Scots Tories calling for revocation of the victorious YES vote?
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
Dr Foxy tells us he is very popular locally, which I totally believe, but given the party will win the seat whoever they put up there why they cannot just ditch him I do not know.
I am liking these defectors standing for new parties or as independents. I'm a lot more comfortable with people doing so than others, and it'll be fun to see how many, if any, can stick around, especially where standing in their current seats. I noticed one of the MPs who stood as an Indy against Trudeau got in.
I think a very small number of them might, but not Ms Sandbach. Still, kudos to her for trying.
Talking of amusing spin from political parties, if you want a good cynical laugh take a gander at the website of the Runnymede and Weybridge Conservatives. It's like something out of the Soviet Union under Stalin: every single mention of he-who-shall-not-be-named-but-who-until-last-month-was-their-distinguished-Tory-MP-and-Cabinet-minister has been ruthlessly airbrushed out of existence:
For my part, this is the acid test. Given the belated conversion of Boris to avoiding crashing out in chaos, I could consider voting Conservative again, especially since the LibDems are pretty dire. But there is no way I'll vote for a party which hasn't got room for Phil Hammond, David Gauke etc, and which indeed is waging some kind of vindictive vendetta against them, and for that matter against Amber Rudd who doesn't even want to stand again.
Come off it, Hammond made his choice and has been no "Right Honourable Friend" to the government. Other rebels kept a bridge open to the party, he has set fire to his and has chosen he'd rather be in bed with the opposition. Why on earth would he be invited back?
The relentless Labour emphasis on the NHS not working well on QT. If this is all that Labour has they are in trouble. They are going to bore voters to death.
Oooh, Labour guy being booed!
If Labour are saying the same things as 2017 they need to be careful. Lots of people gave them the benefit of the doubt and voted for them then. Since then we have had
- almost all Jewish Labour Mps have left - Being investigated for antisemtism - Corbyn has shown the leadership of a wet lettuce dealing with it - Incoherent Brexit policy - you can and regularly do get two senior figures saying different things on the same day - Blocked almost all options for Brexit - May deal was basically what they wanted but they wouldn’t vote for a bad Tory Brexit only a good Labour Brexit
I’m sure there are lots of other things but it’s not as likely to give you a warm morally superior glow now
Many things have changed, true, but it is still a leap to assume that the people who voted for them last time were giving them the benefit of the doubt. It might be a lot of them decided then that whatever those doubts the threat of a Tory majority meant they had to ignore those doubts. If that is the case, the same logic will apply.
It might not be as effective, but depending on Farage it might not need to be quite as effective.
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
Considering the Tory leadership contest consisted of amusing spliff and coke-taking stories, perhaps that is not the line* to take.
I am liking these defectors standing for new parties or as independents. I'm a lot more comfortable with people doing so than others, and it'll be fun to see how many, if any, can stick around, especially where standing in their current seats. I noticed one of the MPs who stood as an Indy against Trudeau got in.
I think a very small number of them might, but not Ms Sandbach. Still, kudos to her for trying.
Trying or ensuring she gets the pay off only defeated MPs get, its a shame we can't know who is legit and who isn't.
Come off it, Hammond made his choice and has been no "Right Honourable Friend" to the government. Other rebels kept a bridge open to the party, he has set fire to his and has chosen he'd rather be in bed with the opposition. Why on earth would he be invited back?
In the hope of getting back some of the lost voters, whose support will be needed in the future once the loons have drifted off with cries of betrayal.
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
They consider an antisemite who while present did not lay wreaths for terrorists who murdered Jews at the Olympics, and did invite other terrorists to Parliament just days after MPs and their wives and aides were murdered, is suitable to be leader. If he can be leader, then what's a little bit of drugs and sex work to throw into the mix?
Come off it, Hammond made his choice and has been no "Right Honourable Friend" to the government. Other rebels kept a bridge open to the party, he has set fire to his and has chosen he'd rather be in bed with the opposition. Why on earth would he be invited back?
In the hope of getting back some of the lost voters, whose support will be needed in the future once the loons have drifted off with cries of betrayal.
In the latest polls, the Tories are on 41%. There aren't many voters to retrieve.
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
Dr Foxy tells us he is very popular locally, which I totally believe, but given the party will win the seat whoever they put up there why they cannot just ditch him I do not know.
I think it will be down to the local party, but I think he is likely to stand down voluntarily.
I have met him a few times, his pork-barrelling of Leicester West has been pretty extensive. Perhaps the most egregious was the large Merlyn Vaz Health and Social Care Centre, named for his mother.
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
They consider an antisemite who while present did not lay wreaths for terrorists who murdered Jews at the Olympics, and did invite other terrorists to Parliament just days after MPs and their wives and aides were murdered, is suitable to be leader. If he can be leader, then what's a little bit of drugs and sex work to throw into the mix?
Why on earth has Labour not yet chucked out Keith Vaz? Are they really of the view that someone suspended from the Commons for six months for offering to buy drugs for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation is fit to be the party's candidate in Leicester East?
They consider an antisemite who while present did not lay wreaths for terrorists who murdered Jews at the Olympics, and did invite other terrorists to Parliament just days after MPs and their wives and aides were murdered, is suitable to be leader. If he can be leader, then what's a little bit of drugs and sex work to throw into the mix?
Comments
Jezza onto something.
I can't think of a fourth after SPSS, SAS, Stata....
But R is doing well in academia! I think?
Let the working week become more diverse and flexible, we dont need government guidance.
It's the same with the next downturn. There have been economists warning that the response to the Great Financial Crash did nothing to solve the fundamental problems and is storing up problems for the next crash, but I think none of them would have been surprised if it had fallen apart in 2013, and here we are in 2019 and it's possible that the wheels have already fallen off and we are continuing only with our momentum, but how certain can we be of this, and would it have been accurately predicted a year ago?
Main site down
From my own experience, Wednesday is the best day off anyway, not Friday.
The danger is though, that many people would be then pressured into working more, and mothers etc would be even more under pressure than now. Witness what has happened when people are given unlimited holidays: they often end up taking fewer than when they were given an annual allocation.
Again, what does she actually expect? If you say you're going to cancel democracy, voters will get very very very angry. It's truly sad, and (for the delicate types on here) of course I regret this coarsening and brutalising of our discourse - but it is entirely predictable, and people like Soubry have stoked it, and made it worse.
R is used primarily by statisticians, but people who do modelling or machine learning tend to use Python. As both are free people gravitate towards those with the greatest range of techniques, so Python is doing well and - surprisingly - R, which was the Next Big Thing, is now seen as unhip and declining in popularity.
PB quiz... (no googling)
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1190013380205133837?s=19
"We have to Revoke Article 50"
Anna Soubry, writing in The Times
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-s-going-to-come-down-to-this-binary-choice-no-deal-or-revoke-7zv3g5s6g
The cold is just God's way of telling us to burn another Lib Dem.
If they ever remake Witchfinder General JRM has another career option.
https://twitter.com/joswinson/status/1190027485162987526
Jennifer Arcuri's £100,000 grant has been deemed appropriate.
The Culture Secretary, Nicky Morgan says the review found
"no impropriety in the awarding of the grant"
The UNS assumption (take the national swing off the share in every constituency) leads to negative shares when the original share is small. I have set negative shares to zero. It's not a bug. It is an unrealistic assumption of UNS which most people and models seem to use. I try to mitigate it with the part use of a multiplicative model but that has its own problems with large shares.
The problem isn't with the tactical voting assumptions. It doesn't assume all Labour voters in St Albans tactically vote LD! It has over estimated the underlying shift against Labour because the Labour share was so small to start with.
Secondly, most voters are are not "very very very angry". Only a very few are outraged. No one has any excuse for making voilent threats.
“We will continue to work closely with all parties and all movements, as we’ve always done, to secure a People’s Vote.”
Not very good at this, are you?
Here she is, doing it again
https://unitynewsnetwork.co.uk/celebrities-politicians-speak-at-anti-brexit-rally-anna-soubry-claims-uk-must-revoke-article-50/
Here's a third. She signed the petition calling for Revoke
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revoke_Article_50_and_remain_in_the_EU_petition
"Notable supporters
A number of celebrities and high-profile politicians have publicly stated that they have signed the petition, including....
Politicians
Anna Soubry MP, Leader of The Independent Group for Change"
Now do shut up.
It should make it easier for those who have voted Tory before to switch though.
And returning to your initial and rather ugly post, no one deserves abuse and threats for making that argument.
https://www.runnymedeweybridgeconservatives.com/
For my part, this is the acid test. Given the belated conversion of Boris to avoiding crashing out in chaos, I could consider voting Conservative again, especially since the LibDems are pretty dire. But there is no way I'll vote for a party which hasn't got room for Phil Hammond, David Gauke etc, and which indeed is waging some kind of vindictive vendetta against them, and for that matter against Amber Rudd who doesn't even want to stand again.
2) the one I see most often is extreme gradient boosting, or XGBoost. Apols if wrong
3) yep, I'd go with that.
4) linear regression models one function and is sensitive to normality - if the residuals are non-normal you have to transform your variables. GLMs have two functions (error and link functions) which removes the necessity for normality
5) linear regression is for continuous variables, logistic regression is for categorical variables.
6) Prophet? (Now obsolete?)
7) Emblem
8) SAS (office and medical statistics), though I think agricultural and field workers used to have a Stata bias.
9) fit your chosen variables one-by-one and plot the variance on a graph. The curve is steep at the beginning but levels off. When it starts levelling off stop fitting.
10) forward selection is when you start of with no variables fitted and progressively add them, backward selection is when you fit all the variables and progressively remove them
11) item response theory has a detection curve that is s-shaped, which allows it to distinguish fine differences at the extremes.
12) and 13) I'd've gone with Poisson for frequency and gamma for severity, but happy to be contradicted
14) YES! Which is why you always have to wait for a bus, regardless of when you arrive at the bus stop...
Oooh, Labour guy being booed!
I guess we get to see a sense of Sandbach's personal vote.
- almost all Jewish Labour Mps have left
- Being investigated for antisemtism
- Corbyn has shown the leadership of a wet lettuce dealing with it
- Incoherent Brexit policy - you can and regularly do get two senior figures saying different things on the same day
- Blocked almost all options for Brexit - May deal was basically what they wanted but they wouldn’t vote for a bad Tory Brexit only a good Labour Brexit
I’m sure there are lots of other things but it’s not as likely to give you a warm morally superior glow now
It has been verified by people attending the site, and through clear photographic evidence, that the graves n which Corbyn laid the wreath are those of the leadership of Black September - the planners, funders, and instigators, of the kidnap, castration, and murder of Jewish civilians. You will note I said planners, not perpetrators. You are correct that the hired muscle who did the deed are buried elsewhere.
The wreath-layingng ceremony for the bombing was indeed held, during the same conference. It was held elsewhere, because that memorial is elsewhere. There are photos of that ceremony too, in which Corbyn can be seen at the back of a large group, not holding a wreath. The wreath he laid was for the leaders of the terror gang, not the broader PLO.
Were they cancelling democracy? Would they have been justifiable targets for very, very, very angry people?
Many of them are still in parliament today.
Now imagine that a NO dominated Scottish parliament had, since that vote, apparently conspired to prevent independence being enacted, and that several prominent Scottish Tories had demanded that the YES vote be simply annulled, and revoked, so that Scotland could return to its place in the UK.
What do you think would happen to those bold Scots Tories calling for revocation of the victorious YES vote?
Well, exactly.
Next.
It might not be as effective, but depending on Farage it might not need to be quite as effective.
* yes, line...
I have met him a few times, his pork-barrelling of Leicester West has been pretty extensive. Perhaps the most egregious was the large Merlyn Vaz Health and Social Care Centre, named for his mother.
Bravo. Bravo.