politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Kamala Harris, one time favourite the Democratic nomination, r
Comments
-
Good long read on John Harris' vox pops:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/anywhere-but-westminster-vox-pops-understanding-uk-political-landscape0 -
No wonder Sturgeon wants to talk about independence:
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1201938829931929601?s=201 -
Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?0 -
Interesting thread on wealth tax. In my area (Surrey) I know a lot of people with £2m+ in totally illiquid assets. Some will have liquid assets in addition, others not. It works this way; an ordinary family house can be worth £1m, and those who have retired from middle management positions will have defined benefit pension assets worth another £1m. So much depends on any definition of the assets to be included in a wealth tax. Pension funds definitely not. And if properties are to be included the threshold needs to relate to average prices in the area. A friend of mine bought a townhouse in Notting Hill in the 70s for peanuts; it is now worth much money, but he does not have other assets. A friend of my wife has a 5 bed house in Streatham. She bought it from the council under the right to buy scheme. Similarly, she does not have other assets.
The problem with simplistic proposals is that they screw the innocent.2 -
But it doesn't have to be just a house. Even if the house only accounts for a third then you as saying they need to make net yield of 1.5% on the rest, and if it's two thirds (not unheard of in London) then it's 3% just to hold one's head above water. Then there's the idiotic idea that someone with £2,999,999 pays £0 in your tax and someone with £3,000,000 suddenly pays £30k per year. What's that marginal rate?Benpointer said:What proportion of people own houses valued at >£3m?
What proportion of the wealthiest 1% have all their assets tied up in their main residence? I'd guess none of them but if I'm wrong, they can always downsize.
There is a case for additional taxes on non-primary residences, in fact I'd be in favour of them.
Other forms of investment are already taxed, interest, dividends and capital are all taxed.
Your proposal is just more politics of envy that will drive wealth creators out of the country and ultimately smash the poor in reduced job creation and lower overall tax take as those on high incomes decided "fuck it, this country isn't for me".2 -
I know a lot of pensioners in Hampstead Garden Suburb who bought houses in the sixties and seventies and now have the state pension and small private pension as income. They couldn't pay a tax based on the current value of the home they bought decades before.Benpointer said:
£3m in assets and none of it liquid? You're the one who's insane.BluerBlue said:
Are you utterly ******* insane? Most people's "wealth" is not in the form of liquid assets or currency that can be used to pay your spiteful envy taxes.Benpointer said:
Who's suggesting confiscating £999 out of every £1000?BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?Casino_Royale said:
It’s simplistic nonsense.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
If you confiscated all of their assets (all £39.4bn) and gave all of it equally to those 14 million they’d have... a one-off payment of £2,800 each.
Corbyn’s promising a bigger bung to the WASPIS.
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
How about we start with 1% p.a. on wealth over a £3m. Just from the top 1% in other words, but since they own over £1.3tn that would bring in £13bn each year.
And they'd hardly notice it.1 -
0
-
I'm surprised your employer requires more than one clause to cover it.ydoethur said:
There are clauses in my contract about not turning up drunk.Time_to_Leave said:
That’s why it has to be copious amounts. Can’t be hungover if you’re still drunk.ydoethur said:
Some of us have to work the following morning.Time_to_Leave said:
Copious amounts of wine (though I have a new tradition of switching to whisky on the Scottish results) along with cured meats and cheese. The only way.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
0 -
I intend to watch the exit poll come in, then get a few hours' sleep and set the alarm for 3 or 3:30, when the bulk of the results are actually landing.nichomar said:
I’m going down the cheddar cheese chocolate peanuts and shortbread biscuits with high quality Spanish red wine until I can’t stand up, that ensures I get up every hour to track progress whilst looking after other problems.viewcode said:
Since 2001 it's been Doritos and dip. Usually garlic dip. It used to be Schloer as well, tho' that's not too good these days.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
Though if that doesn't work out and I end up sitting through the entire thing, I would imagine I'll just eat plates of chocolate biscuits until I'm all sugared out.1 -
Let's start by taxing 1% of _everyone's_ wealth every year, starting with you. No one would advocate for this unimaginably stupid idea if they had to stump up the hard cash themselves on top of all the other taxes they pay.Benpointer said:
Well, I'd compromise on £10m to get started. Or how about 1% of everything above £3m.Time_to_Leave said:
Why are you assuming those with £3m in assets have it invested in anything much more than their house It business? I’m being slightly provocative but if you’re in single digit millions it’s not always the case that you have much in the way of liquidity. Make it £10m and I start to agree (with some concerns about marginal tax rates).Benpointer said:
Nonsense. If they cannot make >4% + inflation from it they are being badly advised. In which case they will just have to live with £2,970,000 next year (when they will fall below the @Benpointer Wealth Tax threshold).Time_to_Leave said:
Most people with £3m in assets would struggle to pay your £30,000 wealth tax on top of their income tax etc.Benpointer said:
And they'd hardly notice it.BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?Casino_Royale said:
It’s simplistic nonsense.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
If you confiscated all of their assets (all £39.4bn) and gave all of it equally to those 14 million they’d have... a one-off payment of £2,800 each.
Corbyn’s promising a bigger bung to the WASPIS.
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
I know a few of you are thinking envy tax etc. but honestly, I am comfortably off, not envious. I just think we need to address the inequality a bit more than we currently do.0 -
Well, perhaps they thought I was a particularly devious drunk. The SeanT of pedagogy.eristdoof said:
I'm surprised your employer requires more than one clause to cover it.ydoethur said:
There are clauses in my contract about not turning up drunk.Time_to_Leave said:
That’s why it has to be copious amounts. Can’t be hungover if you’re still drunk.ydoethur said:
Some of us have to work the following morning.Time_to_Leave said:
Copious amounts of wine (though I have a new tradition of switching to whisky on the Scottish results) along with cured meats and cheese. The only way.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
0 -
nerves? what nerves?kle4 said:
That should calm some Tory nerves a bit.RobD said:Updated with the YouGov:
https://imgur.com/Y6NsnSA
https://i.imgur.com/HNS0lgD.gif?noredirect0 -
I've often thought about doing that — not watching all the inane chat for the first few hours — but it always proves impossible.Black_Rook said:
I intend to watch the exit poll come in, then get a few hours' sleep and set the alarm for 3 or 3:30, when the bulk of the results are actually landing.nichomar said:
I’m going down the cheddar cheese chocolate peanuts and shortbread biscuits with high quality Spanish red wine until I can’t stand up, that ensures I get up every hour to track progress whilst looking after other problems.viewcode said:
Since 2001 it's been Doritos and dip. Usually garlic dip. It used to be Schloer as well, tho' that's not too good these days.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
Though if that doesn't work out and I end up sitting through the entire thing, I would imagine I'll just eat plates of chocolate biscuits until I'm all sugared out.0 -
So let's ditch capital gains tax like the Swiss, shall we?NickPalmer said:
It's a problem that most people wouldn't mind having. Few asset-holders have their entire wealth in illiquid form.Time_to_Leave said:
Most people with £3m in assets would struggle to pay your £30,000 wealth tax on top of their income tax etc.
This is, after all, akin to Swiss policy. The Swiss feel that a modest wealth tax is helpful in inducing the wealthy to invest their wealth profitably, seeling off land they don't need etc. I've not heard that people are fleeing Switzerland as a result.1 -
Whilst I adore him as a short film maker his 2017 vox pops were hopelessly inaccurate.CarlottaVance said:Good long read on John Harris' vox pops:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/anywhere-but-westminster-vox-pops-understanding-uk-political-landscape
If you went by his 2017 films May would currently have a hundred seat majority.0 -
She might well be back - and probably without here sister running the campaign.Peter_the_Punter said:It was a really great call. You should be proud of it Mike. I got on at 66/1 too, but layed off most some while back.
She was a strong candidate but I think there were serious weaknesses in her campaign organisation.
However talented she might be - and she is - that hardly ever works at a national level.0 -
Had a very similar leaflet in my (also very, very safe) Conservative-held constituency the other day. Schools, hospitals, crime, environment and animal welfare all included. Emphasised need for a Conservative majority Government, and threat of Indyref2 without one. But no mention of Europe, Brexit or the Prime Minister. It might just be that, in areas that are either pro-Remain or roughly split down the middle, they don't feel the need to further antagonise Remain-leaning voters by going on about Brexit.Mauve said:Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?0 -
Unless the exit poll is boring, in which case there's not much point getting up later anyway, the excitement prevents getting to sleep I find.Andy_JS said:
I've often thought about doing that — not watching all the inane chat for the first few hours — but it always proves impossible.Black_Rook said:
I intend to watch the exit poll come in, then get a few hours' sleep and set the alarm for 3 or 3:30, when the bulk of the results are actually landing.nichomar said:
I’m going down the cheddar cheese chocolate peanuts and shortbread biscuits with high quality Spanish red wine until I can’t stand up, that ensures I get up every hour to track progress whilst looking after other problems.viewcode said:
Since 2001 it's been Doritos and dip. Usually garlic dip. It used to be Schloer as well, tho' that's not too good these days.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
Though if that doesn't work out and I end up sitting through the entire thing, I would imagine I'll just eat plates of chocolate biscuits until I'm all sugared out.1 -
The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
0 -
The only difficult decision is at what point does today become tomorrow when more alcohol should be rejected so if I go at two and get up at three is it still today or already tomorrow but I do feel I’m over complicating things.Andy_JS said:
I've often thought about doing that — not watching all the inane chat for the first few hours — but it always proves impossible.Black_Rook said:
I intend to watch the exit poll come in, then get a few hours' sleep and set the alarm for 3 or 3:30, when the bulk of the results are actually landing.nichomar said:
I’m going down the cheddar cheese chocolate peanuts and shortbread biscuits with high quality Spanish red wine until I can’t stand up, that ensures I get up every hour to track progress whilst looking after other problems.viewcode said:
Since 2001 it's been Doritos and dip. Usually garlic dip. It used to be Schloer as well, tho' that's not too good these days.nichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
Though if that doesn't work out and I end up sitting through the entire thing, I would imagine I'll just eat plates of chocolate biscuits until I'm all sugared out.0 -
I know houses are expensive in Hampstead, but I doubt there are many pensioners there who i) have a house worth over 3 Million and ii) have not much else. For a start very many downgrade when they retire.dellertronic said:
I know a lot of pensioners in Hampstead Garden Suburb who bought houses in the sixties and seventies and now have the state pension and small private pension as income. They couldn't pay a tax based on the current value of the home they bought decades before.Benpointer said:
£3m in assets and none of it liquid? You're the one who's insane.BluerBlue said:
Are you utterly ******* insane? Most people's "wealth" is not in the form of liquid assets or currency that can be used to pay your spiteful envy taxes.Benpointer said:
Who's suggesting confiscating £999 out of every £1000?BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
How about we start with 1% p.a. on wealth over a £3m. Just from the top 1% in other words, but since they own over £1.3tn that would bring in £13bn each year.
And they'd hardly notice it.
And anyway, there are ways of making sure that such a tax does not catch these people. The easiest would be to value the wealth of the primary property of residence based on the price at which it was bought. First of all these pensioners you know will not be over the 3M wealth mark. Secondly people who *have paid* over 3M for a house chose to do so and so are almost certainly in the "rich enough to pay 1%" category.
1 -
He makes the point that Vox Pops are useless for predicting results - but do illuminate the underlying themes not picked up by polling or the Twittersphere.Alistair said:
Whilst I adore him as a short film maker his 2017 vox pops were hopelessly inaccurate.CarlottaVance said:Good long read on John Harris' vox pops:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/anywhere-but-westminster-vox-pops-understanding-uk-political-landscape
If you went by his 2017 films May would currently have a hundred seat majority.0 -
We already have a wealth tax, it's called capital gains tax.2
-
I'm up for it, no problem. I don't mind paying tax and contributing to the world around me. I don't think almost anyone actually objects to all tax in principle, so we're just arguing about degree. The thing about a wealth tax is that it addresses things which are partly hard to evade tax on (land, houses) and the fact that although our income gap is not as large as some countries, or wealth gap is huge.BluerBlue said:
Let's start by taxing 1% of _everyone's_ wealth every year, starting with you. No one would advocate for this unimaginably stupid idea if they had to stump up the hard cash themselves on top of all the other taxes they pay.
A reasonable Tory position (I think Charles ahs suggested something similar) would be a small wealth tax to pay for a modest reduction in income tax, so as to encourage people to work for a living instead of living off inherited assets.0 -
Does the imbalance of wealth between Mobutu Sese Seko and his fellow citizens cause any difficulty for your theory, or that between the average Russian oligarch and the average Russian? You are like the subjects in the Milgram experiment, relentlessly turning up the imbalance according to instructions. It is not inherently impossible that there is a skew in the system which makes the system unfair and inefficient, and it is not the case that being a conservative requires you to commit absolutely to a caricature version of unfettered free market capitalism.MaxPB said:
No. It's the politics of envy and it does none of us any good. What we need to do is ensure that those wealthy people feel as though they can invest in this country and create jobs for the rest of us. Taxing them into leaving won't achieve anything, really.Benpointer said:
Out of interest, is there any level of inequality that you would consider too much?MaxPB said:
Billionaires have lots of money, in related news it turns out bears really do shit in the woods.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study0 -
But not the importance of said themes.CarlottaVance said:
He makes the point that Vox Pops are useless for predicting results - but do illuminate the underlying themes not picked up by polling or the Twittersphere.Alistair said:
Whilst I adore him as a short film maker his 2017 vox pops were hopelessly inaccurate.CarlottaVance said:Good long read on John Harris' vox pops:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/anywhere-but-westminster-vox-pops-understanding-uk-political-landscape
If you went by his 2017 films May would currently have a hundred seat majority.0 -
That's too clever for Marxists like Corbyn & McDonnell to understand.eristdoof said:
I know houses are expensive in Hampstead, but I doubt there are many pensioners there who i) have a house worth over 3 Million and ii) have not much else. For a start very many downgrade when they retire.dellertronic said:
I know a lot of pensioners in Hampstead Garden Suburb who bought houses in the sixties and seventies and now have the state pension and small private pension as income. They couldn't pay a tax based on the current value of the home they bought decades before.Benpointer said:
£3m in assets and none of it liquid? You're the one who's insane.BluerBlue said:
Are you utterly ******* insane? Most people's "wealth" is not in the form of liquid assets or currency that can be used to pay your spiteful envy taxes.Benpointer said:
Who's suggesting confiscating £999 out of every £1000?BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
How about we start with 1% p.a. on wealth over a £3m. Just from the top 1% in other words, but since they own over £1.3tn that would bring in £13bn each year.
And they'd hardly notice it.
And anyway, there are ways of making sure that such a tax does not catch these people. The easiest would be to value the wealth of the primary property of residence based on the price at which it was bought. First of all these pensioners you know will not be over the 3M wealth mark. Secondly people who *have paid* over 3M for a house chose to do so and so are almost certainly in the "rich enough to pay 1%" category.
They just look at the current on paper house value and sneer "rich bastards, let's tax them to poverty ".0 -
How about you downsize your desire for extreme inequality instead?BluerBlue said:
How about you downsize your desire for other people's assets instead?Benpointer said:
What proportion of people own houses valued at >£3m?MaxPB said:
Given that the majority of assets are in primary residences how do those people pay for it? Do they sell small bits of their house?Benpointer said:
Nonsense. If they cannot make >4% + inflation from it they are being badly advised. In which case they will just have to live with £2,970,000 next year (when they will fall below the @Benpointer Wealth Tax threshold).Time_to_Leave said:
Most people with £3m in assets would struggle to pay your £30,000 wealth tax on top of their income tax etc.Benpointer said:
Who's suggesting confiscating £999 out of every £1000?BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?Casino_Royale said:
It’s simplistic nonsense.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
If you confiscated all of their assets (all £39.4bn) and gave all of it equally to those 14 million they’d have... a one-off payment of £2,800 each.
Corbyn’s promising a bigger bung to the WASPIS.
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
How about we start with 1% p.a. on wealth over a £3m. Just from the top 1% in other words, but since they own over £1.3tn that would bring in £13bn each year.
And they'd hardly notice it.
What proportion of the wealthiest 1% have all their assets tied up in their main residence? I'd guess none of them but if I'm wrong, they can always downsize.0 -
That could be the case, my constituency was only a bit more leave than average. Surprised they didn't go for the Lib Dems in it though, rather than Labour, given local demographics. It might also be that my MP is one of the more remainy Conservatives, so wants to leave himself some wiggle-room later on.Black_Rook said:
Had a very similar leaflet in my (also very, very safe) Conservative-held constituency the other day. Schools, hospitals, crime, environment and animal welfare all included. Emphasised need for a Conservative majority Government, and threat of Indyref2 without one. But no mention of Europe, Brexit or the Prime Minister. It might just be that, in areas that are either pro-Remain or roughly split down the middle, they don't feel the need to further antagonise Remain-leaning voters by going on about Brexit.Mauve said:Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?
0 -
No, we would have to eliminate CGT so that sale of assets to pay for the new tax is tax free. Are you in favour of that? Because that's how the Swiss make it work.NickPalmer said:
I'm up for it, no problem. I don't mind paying tax and contributing to the world around me. I don't think almost anyone actually objects to all tax in principle, so we're just arguing about degree. The thing about a wealth tax is that it addresses things which are partly hard to evade tax on (land, houses) and the fact that although our income gap is not as large as some countries, or wealth gap is huge.BluerBlue said:
Let's start by taxing 1% of _everyone's_ wealth every year, starting with you. No one would advocate for this unimaginably stupid idea if they had to stump up the hard cash themselves on top of all the other taxes they pay.
A reasonable Tory position would be a small wealth tax to pay for a modest reduction in income tax, so as to encourage people to work for a living instead of living off inherited assets.1 -
This is clever. The people fed up of Brexit, who aren't particularly interested in politics, and who hear the 'Get Brexit Done' message from Johnson are being well served by passive media. More sophisticated individuals, who take a more nuanced approach and are a bit more au fait with political realities (but are *also* fed up with Brexit) can read through the literature and pretend that its politics as normal...Black_Rook said:
Had a very similar leaflet in my (also very, very safe) Conservative-held constituency the other day. Schools, hospitals, crime, environment and animal welfare all included. Emphasised need for a Conservative majority Government, and threat of Indyref2 without one. But no mention of Europe, Brexit or the Prime Minister. It might just be that, in areas that are either pro-Remain or roughly split down the middle, they don't feel the need to further antagonise Remain-leaning voters by going on about Brexit.Mauve said:Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?0 -
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook0 -
I assume you are familiar with Johan Galtung. You sound as though you are quoting from his work in the 60s and 70s (which I agree has much merit).IshmaelZ said:
Does the imbalance of wealth between Mobutu Sese Seko and his fellow citizens cause any difficulty for your theory, or that between the average Russian oligarch and the average Russian? You are like the subjects in the Milgram experiment, relentlessly turning up the imbalance according to instructions. It is not inherently impossible that there is a skew in the system which makes the system unfair and inefficient, and it is not the case that being a conservative requires you to commit absolutely to a caricature version of unfettered free market capitalism.MaxPB said:
No. It's the politics of envy and it does none of us any good. What we need to do is ensure that those wealthy people feel as though they can invest in this country and create jobs for the rest of us. Taxing them into leaving won't achieve anything, really.Benpointer said:
Out of interest, is there any level of inequality that you would consider too much?MaxPB said:
Billionaires have lots of money, in related news it turns out bears really do shit in the woods.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study0 -
You may have a point there. Mine belongs to the not quite so ardent as the 21 rebels but still definitely a Remain-sympathiser tendency too. Was one of the Tories who voted against Theresa May on the meaningful vote amendment two years ago; alongside figures like Grieve, Clarke, Soubry, Allen and Wollaston.Mauve said:
That could be the case, my constituency was only a bit more leave than average. Surprised they didn't go for the Lib Dems in it though, rather than Labour, given local demographics. It might also be that my MP is one of the more remainy Conservatives, so wants to leave himself some wiggle-room later on.Black_Rook said:
Had a very similar leaflet in my (also very, very safe) Conservative-held constituency the other day. Schools, hospitals, crime, environment and animal welfare all included. Emphasised need for a Conservative majority Government, and threat of Indyref2 without one. But no mention of Europe, Brexit or the Prime Minister. It might just be that, in areas that are either pro-Remain or roughly split down the middle, they don't feel the need to further antagonise Remain-leaning voters by going on about Brexit.Mauve said:Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?0 -
Most other taxes are also designed to be taken from an actual source of liquid currency (income tax on ... cash income, CGT on ... cash realized from the sale of an asset).MaxPB said:
No, we would have to eliminate CGT so that sale of assets to pay for the new tax is tax free. Are you in favour of that? Because that's how the Swiss make it work.NickPalmer said:
I'm up for it, no problem. I don't mind paying tax and contributing to the world around me. I don't think almost anyone actually objects to all tax in principle, so we're just arguing about degree. The thing about a wealth tax is that it addresses things which are partly hard to evade tax on (land, houses) and the fact that although our income gap is not as large as some countries, or wealth gap is huge.BluerBlue said:
Let's start by taxing 1% of _everyone's_ wealth every year, starting with you. No one would advocate for this unimaginably stupid idea if they had to stump up the hard cash themselves on top of all the other taxes they pay.
A reasonable Tory position would be a small wealth tax to pay for a modest reduction in income tax, so as to encourage people to work for a living instead of living off inherited assets.
The wealth tax, by contrast, assumes what cannot be assumed - that everyone keeps large sums of money lying around just to pay this stupid, arbitrary tax.
And who wants the gigantic annual bureaucracy of assessing everyone's assets to make sure that the correct tax is paid? That's why if it is imposed, it should be imposed on _everyone_. The resulting unrest would make the Poll Tax riots look like a Sunday stroll down Piccadilly, and innoculate the public against socialism for a generation.1 -
Beefy chipsticks, cheese and portnichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
0 -
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook0 -
Use the Norwegian approach of self-assessment with all returns on public record, so if you forget to mention some huge asset, someone can remind you.BluerBlue said:
And who wants the gigantic annual bureaucracy of assessing everyone's assets to make sure that the correct tax is paid? That's why if it is imposed, it should be imposed on _everyone_. The resulting unrest would make the Poll Tax riots look like a Sunday stroll down Piccadilly, and innoculate the public against socialism for a generation.
You do realise that quite a lot of people have no net wealth at all?0 -
You can get beefy chipsticks? I thought they only came in "coat your mouth and tongue in salt" flavour.beentheredonethat said:
Beefy chipsticks, cheese and portnichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
I'll be on the beer and pizza (without pineapple) on election night. Depending on the exit poll I may have run out of beer by 11pm and have started on the rum...
0 -
For people who are resistant to the idea of a wealth tax, see the USA:
https://smartasset.com/taxes/new-york-property-tax-calculator
You might argue that, at current levels, it doesn't do much to diminish wealth inequality, but the principle is not particularly controversial over there.0 -
Those comparative education numbers have come at a really inopportune time for the SNP. Plenty of ammunition for their opponents to use against them in the last 9 days,1
-
Yes, my MP rebelled on the meaningful vote too. Since then he's just stuck to complaining on Twitter about Brexit being bad, rather than taking any actual action (a bit like a Conservative Jess Phillips with respect to Corbyn). Could be a deliberate tactic to keep leavers on side in these seats, so they aren't reminded that their sitting MP isn't a leaver.Black_Rook said:
You may have a point there. Mine belongs to the not quite so ardent as the 21 rebels but still definitely a Remain-sympathiser tendency too. Was one of the Tories who voted against Theresa May on the meaningful vote amendment two years ago; alongside figures like Grieve, Clarke, Soubry, Allen and Wollaston.Mauve said:
That could be the case, my constituency was only a bit more leave than average. Surprised they didn't go for the Lib Dems in it though, rather than Labour, given local demographics. It might also be that my MP is one of the more remainy Conservatives, so wants to leave himself some wiggle-room later on.Black_Rook said:
Had a very similar leaflet in my (also very, very safe) Conservative-held constituency the other day. Schools, hospitals, crime, environment and animal welfare all included. Emphasised need for a Conservative majority Government, and threat of Indyref2 without one. But no mention of Europe, Brexit or the Prime Minister. It might just be that, in areas that are either pro-Remain or roughly split down the middle, they don't feel the need to further antagonise Remain-leaning voters by going on about Brexit.Mauve said:Interesting. Just had my first Conservative leaflet from my current (very safe) Conservative MP. The word Brexit doesn't appear at all. Instead it focusses on local transport, hospitals and schools, as well as the threat from an SNP / Labour government.
A change in tactics, perhaps?0 -
That’s irrelevant you have to look at the weather on the day . On the 6 th December 1923 the UK was under a small ridge for most of the vote .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook
Rain moved in late in the evening to the far nw .
There’s still some uncertainty with the forecast , but the GFS and ECM are interesting of you like a bit of snow , more especially for higher elevations .
0 -
Veep?0
-
The problem for Harris, Booker or any other candidate banking on the african vote is that only those percieved to have Obama's direct blessing or Oprah can siphon that block from Biden.
Only if Obama goes on TV and says don't vote Biden will change that.0 -
British people would not accept the loss of confidentiality that this would entail.NickPalmer said:
Use the Norwegian approach of self-assessment with all returns on public record, so if you forget to mention some huge asset, someone can remind you.BluerBlue said:
And who wants the gigantic annual bureaucracy of assessing everyone's assets to make sure that the correct tax is paid? That's why if it is imposed, it should be imposed on _everyone_. The resulting unrest would make the Poll Tax riots look like a Sunday stroll down Piccadilly, and innoculate the public against socialism for a generation.
You do realise that quite a lot of people have no net wealth at all?0 -
Excess Bedrooms Tax!!Benpointer said:
What proportion of people own houses valued at >£3m?MaxPB said:
Given that the majority of assets are in primary residences how do those people pay for it? Do they sell small bits of their house?Benpointer said:
Nonsense. If they cannot make >4% + inflation from it they are being badly advised. In which case they will just have to live with £2,970,000 next year (when they will fall below the @Benpointer Wealth Tax threshold).Time_to_Leave said:
Most people with £3m in assets would struggle to pay your £30,000 wealth tax on top of their income tax etc.Benpointer said:
Who's suggesting confiscating £999 out of every £1000?BluerBlue said:
I'll only bother answering your 5.:Benpointer said:
Good grief, where to begin?Casino_Royale said:
It’s simplistic nonsense.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
If you confiscated all of their assets (all £39.4bn) and gave all of it equally to those 14 million they’d have... a one-off payment of £2,800 each.
Corbyn’s promising a bigger bung to the WASPIS.
1. No one is suggesting confiscating £39.4bn from six people and giving 14m £2,800 each.
(2. Although as an aside, if they did it would improve the sum of human happiness in the UK immeasurably.)
3. Most of those 14m have no assets at all beyond the clothes they wear and the furniture they sit on - quite a few don't even have the furniture.
4. What is that £39bn doing exactly?
5. Why would anyone need more than a few million let alone multiple billions? what's the point of it?
It's none of your business. But once the Government decides they can confiscate 999 pounds out of every 1000 you have, property rights are dead and the entire economic system collapses. And that's everyone's business.
How about we start with 1% p.a. on wealth over a £3m. Just from the top 1% in other words, but since they own over £1.3tn that would bring in £13bn each year.
And they'd hardly notice it.
What proportion of the wealthiest 1% have all their assets tied up in their main residence? I'd guess none of them but if I'm wrong, they can always downsize.0 -
Your knowledge of how people get very rich is very limited if you really believe they 'sit on their wealth'.Benpointer said:
If you want that wealth to be used to 'buy stuff' move it to the poor... they spend money rather than sit on it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Actually you do, every time they buy stuff. And we can, and should, get them to buy more of our stuff. But that's too proactive for many people, so they prefer just getting annoyed about it.Sandpit said:
One doesn’t make the poor richer, simply by making the rich poorer.MaxPB said:
No. It's the politics of envy and it does none of us any good. What we need to do is ensure that those wealthy people feel as though they can invest in this country and create jobs for the rest of us. Taxing them into leaving won't achieve anything, really.Benpointer said:
Out of interest, is there any level of inequality that you would consider too much?MaxPB said:
Billionaires have lots of money, in related news it turns out bears really do shit in the woods.Benpointer said:O/T Not sure if this has been covered already here but this cannot be good for the country...
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study0 -
Only if California is a swing state.rottenborough said:Veep?
0 -
In 1923, there weren't any mobile phones or internet, no central heating, and not as many motor cars as today.nico67 said:
That’s irrelevant you have to look at the weather on the day . On the 6 th December 1923 the UK was under a small ridge for most of the vote .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook
Rain moved in late in the evening to the far nw .
There’s still some uncertainty with the forecast , but the GFS and ECM are interesting if you like a bit of snow , more especially for higher elevations .0 -
re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?0 -
I have vodka in, just in case the exit poll announces a Jezza win. We are all good Soviets then.beentheredonethat said:
Beefy chipsticks, cheese and portnichomar said:What are people planning to sustain themselves with on election night I know popcorn is traditional but there must be better solutions, given the proximity of Christmas seasonal offerings or are just going to rely on a sick bag?
2 -
Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/10 -
Not just Pisa:MarqueeMark said:Those comparative education numbers have come at a really inopportune time for the SNP. Plenty of ammunition for their opponents to use against them in the last 9 days,
https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/1201953366617788416?s=201 -
There is much greater apathy today than in 1923.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In 1923, there weren't any mobile phones or internet, no central heating, and not as many motor cars as today.nico67 said:
That’s irrelevant you have to look at the weather on the day . On the 6 th December 1923 the UK was under a small ridge for most of the vote .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook
Rain moved in late in the evening to the far nw .
There’s still some uncertainty with the forecast , but the GFS and ECM are interesting if you like a bit of snow , more especially for higher elevations .
I don't expect turnout will be greater than 65%.0 -
In terms of turnout and weather .
Generally it doesn’t make a huge difference but that’s because the vast majority of elections are not held in the winter months .
It’s more likely though to effect undecided voters . It also tends to have a slight effect on demographic C2DE groups.0 -
Good point. CGT taxes realised gains not wealth. "Buy and hold" is my favourite share-buying tactic.camel said:re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?
1 -
Ashfield Independents slipping. New best prices:
Con 5/6
Ashfield Independents 3/1
Lab 11/20 -
I pointed this out earlier. Labour doing beter than expected. Gyimah could be a goner.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/10 -
If some of the worst case scenarios in the current model outputs come to pass they won't be getting ballot boxes to some polling stations.nico67 said:In terms of turnout and weather .
Generally it doesn’t make a huge difference but that’s because the vast majority of elections are not held in the winter months .
It’s more likely though to effect undecided voters . It also tends to have a slight effect on demographic C2DE groups.0 -
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1201928420495691778
I certainly think she would have had a better shot at beating Trump than Elizabeth 'McGovern' Warren.
I was red on her.
0 -
The SNP won't be in power in scotland for ever.CarlottaVance said:
Not just Pisa:MarqueeMark said:Those comparative education numbers have come at a really inopportune time for the SNP. Plenty of ammunition for their opponents to use against them in the last 9 days,
https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/1201953366617788416?s=200 -
There's been a lot of movement towards Con over the past 2 weeks despite poll gap closing. I'm on Con at 11/10.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/10 -
Incidentally, despite the assurances given by LibDem HQ to Mike, the "LibDems are best placed to win here" stuff from him is, I'm told, still being sent out in Portsmouth South, where the constituency poll and MRP have shown it to be nonsense. Mike's got an absolute right to campaign for his preference, but I'd think it was a bad long-term investment to have his name used indiscriminately when it will turn out badly wrong - people won't believe it even when it's true.0
-
Since the Liberal Democrats were third last time, if he failed to take it it would hardly indicate Labour are doing ‘better than expected.’Stocky said:
I pointed this out earlier. Labour doing beter than expected. Gyimah could be a goner.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/1
Admittedly their candidate is the extraordinary Emma Dent Coad.0 -
Buttigieg now ahead of Warren on BF.0
-
I laid Labour at the start of the campaign - was confident but now getting twitchy and may bailcamel said:
There's been a lot of movement towards Con over the past 2 weeks despite poll gap closing. I'm on Con at 11/10.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/10 -
That’s a very good point. Also what about collections like wine or art?camel said:re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?
0 -
When you see what people wear to go to a nightclub these days (not a lot) I don't think they'd be deterred from voting by a light frosting of snow.speedy2 said:
There is much greater apathy today than in 1923.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In 1923, there weren't any mobile phones or internet, no central heating, and not as many motor cars as today.nico67 said:
That’s irrelevant you have to look at the weather on the day . On the 6 th December 1923 the UK was under a small ridge for most of the vote .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook
Rain moved in late in the evening to the far nw .
There’s still some uncertainty with the forecast , but the GFS and ECM are interesting if you like a bit of snow , more especially for higher elevations .
I don't expect turnout will be greater than 65%.0 -
Complexity is one of the major downsides in that the IRS and taxpayers would have to engage thousands of valuers to conduct private valuations and then debate them every year.camel said:re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?
On of Warren's team suggested that in the event of a dispute or difficulties in doing a valuation, that the government could just take 3% of the share capital directly.....0 -
I meant better than expected in the betting markets - as evidenced by their shortening price over the last few days.ydoethur said:
Since the Liberal Democrats were third last time, if he failed to take it it would hardly indicate Labour are doing ‘better than expected.’Stocky said:
I pointed this out earlier. Labour doing beter than expected. Gyimah could be a goner.StuartDickson said:Lib Dems lengthening in Kensington. New best prices:
Con 8/11
Lab 7/2
LD 5/1
Admittedly their candidate is the extraordinary Emma Dent Coad.0 -
Wine counts as an extra-liquid asset.Time_to_Leave said:
That’s a very good point. Also what about collections like wine or art?camel said:re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?1 -
Projected lying snow depths for Friday next week. This is before the (apparent) snowstorm hits the southeast that day.
https://fs.nwstatic.co.uk/monthly_2019_12/68539D90-EA8E-4ECC-9C61-04B86A51B039.jpeg.fe357f6ffd20c0cff13d041de085e23b.jpeg
0 -
Does STV stand for Scottish TV or are they debating the Single Transferable Vote?CarlottaVance said:0 -
I'm almost convinced that the only things that can deny the Conservatives a majority is the last Debate and the snow on election day.nico67 said:In terms of turnout and weather .
Generally it doesn’t make a huge difference but that’s because the vast majority of elections are not held in the winter months .
It’s more likely though to effect undecided voters . It also tends to have a slight effect on demographic C2DE groups.
But it's too early, weather prediction accuracy is poor 100 hours or more into the future.0 -
Richard Leonard is a spectacularly unimpressive person. He makes Wullie Rennie look like he has gravitas.1
-
jesus christ that's some weak saucebigjohnowls said:0 -
Watching Burnley v City live on amazon prime video on my mobile and tablet
This is free and could be a big threat to Sky and BT0 -
True . The issue is more likely though in rural parts . The differential turnout could impact in seats where you have a town in the middle of a rural area . It’s still some way off and the modeling could change .Mysticrose said:
If some of the worst case scenarios in the current model outputs come to pass they won't be getting ballot boxes to some polling stations.nico67 said:In terms of turnout and weather .
Generally it doesn’t make a huge difference but that’s because the vast majority of elections are not held in the winter months .
It’s more likely though to effect undecided voters . It also tends to have a slight effect on demographic C2DE groups.0 -
-
The leader of the Scottish Labour Party is a dud?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Richard Leonard is a spectacularly unimpressive person. He makes Wullie Rennie look like he has gravitas.
I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.1 -
Do not bad mouth my girl Lizzie Maximus The Warrenator.rottenborough said:https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1201928420495691778
I certainly think she would have had a better shot at beating Trump than Elizabeth 'McGovern' Warren.
I was red on her.0 -
Open to corruption these PR voting methodsydoethur said:
Does STV stand for Scottish TV or are they debating the Single Transferable Vote?CarlottaVance said:
Av Lead for sale | eBay0 -
I had a leaflet this week that implied that the Lib Dems are second in Wycombe and Labour fifth. I’m sure Steve Baker would be delighted to have people think they should vote Lib Dem tactically to get rid of him.NickPalmer said:Incidentally, despite the assurances given by LibDem HQ to Mike, the "LibDems are best placed to win here" stuff from him is, I'm told, still being sent out in Portsmouth South, where the constituency poll and MRP have shown it to be nonsense. Mike's got an absolute right to campaign for his preference, but I'd think it was a bad long-term investment to have his name used indiscriminately when it will turn out badly wrong - people won't believe it even when it's true.
0 -
PLEASE let Test cricket go to Amazon Prime...Big_G_NorthWales said:Watching Burnley v City live on amazon prime video on my mobile and tablet
This is free and could be a big threat to Sky and BT
Sky’s welcome to the hit’n’giggle, er, T20.0 -
Why mess with success?ydoethur said:
The leader of the Scottish Labour Party is a dud?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Richard Leonard is a spectacularly unimpressive person. He makes Wullie Rennie look like he has gravitas.
I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.1 -
#stvdebate at least it s not as bad as the euro debates
Unionists just too divided - jocks are just not canny enough to avoid #indyref2
The future of unity on this island is at stake, ie the UK
Nobody seems to care1 -
No Scottish Labour Leader in many a long year has messed with success. They haven’t even dined in the same camp!kle4 said:
Why mess with success?ydoethur said:
The leader of the Scottish Labour Party is a dud?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Richard Leonard is a spectacularly unimpressive person. He makes Wullie Rennie look like he has gravitas.
I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.0 -
It is going to look like a golden era once James Kelly is installed as next leader.ydoethur said:
The leader of the Scottish Labour Party is a dud?AramintaMoonbeamQC said:Richard Leonard is a spectacularly unimpressive person. He makes Wullie Rennie look like he has gravitas.
I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.1 -
Amazon Prime is not free unless your using someone elses like me.Big_G_NorthWales said:Watching Burnley v City live on amazon prime video on my mobile and tablet
This is free and could be a big threat to Sky and BT0 -
Or that old painting in the attic that turns out to be an old master: do you get done for tax evasion if you didn’t declare it for several years because you didn’t know? I would expect Antiques Roadshow to go off air fairly rapidly.Time_to_Leave said:
That’s a very good point. Also what about collections like wine or art?camel said:re Wealth tax.
It's probably a dumb question, but how would wealth be assessed so that a wealth tax can be levied? I understand that if I sell my shares, its easy to calculate the gain, but how would unsold (and indeed never traded) shares be valued?
Maybe it does have some merit after all...1 -
But that's when their out for a night on the town. And as a teacher friend of mine once notably said "their hormones are what's keeping them warm"!Alphabet_Soup said:
When you see what people wear to go to a nightclub these days (not a lot) I don't think they'd be deterred from voting by a light frosting of snow.speedy2 said:
There is much greater apathy today than in 1923.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In 1923, there weren't any mobile phones or internet, no central heating, and not as many motor cars as today.nico67 said:
That’s irrelevant you have to look at the weather on the day . On the 6 th December 1923 the UK was under a small ridge for most of the vote .Sunil_Prasannan said:
Turnout was 71% in December 1923.bookseller said:
"...An unsettled and windy week is expected...Many areas are likely to have showers and some lengthier outbreaks of rain. Rainfall amounts above average / well-above average over Wales and western England. Showers likely to become wintry at times over hills, especially through the second half of the week, when northern areas could even see some wintry precipitation to lower levels for a time."nico67 said:The weather could play a role on Election Day .
More especially for areas with some elevation . How this effects turnout is hard to say at this point .
But postal votes would be in by then , I would have thought that would favour the Tories but on the day any snowfall is more likely to cause issues in rural areas and outside of the major towns and cities .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/outlook
Rain moved in late in the evening to the far nw .
There’s still some uncertainty with the forecast , but the GFS and ECM are interesting if you like a bit of snow , more especially for higher elevations .
I don't expect turnout will be greater than 65%.0
