politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Thoughts from a Big Beast

NickPalmer said:

Benpointer said:

Andy_JS said:

In the previous thread a lot of Labour supporters were talking about wealth and inequality. If that's a crucial issue for voters, why do they think it is that the biggest swings from Labour to the Tories at the election are likely to be in less wealthy areas like Stoke-on-Trent, Grimsby, Scunthorpe, etc, whereas pretty wealthy constituencies like Chipping Barnet, Cambridge and Canterbury are likely to be pretty good for Labour?

It's a very good question.

Maybe poor voters don't care about the mega-rich. Maybe they don't believe anything can be done about it. Maybe they just don't like what Labour are proposing. Maybe they have been scared off progressive taxes by the mega-rich controlled press. I don't know.

But it is a good question.

It's been like that up to a point for a long time. There's a little estate in Broxtowe where people are really seriously poor. Lots of single parents, some elderly people down on their luck, some drug-dealers, nothing much to do. Most people living there are better off under Labour governments, but by and large they don't vote - life is rough, politics is for other people. What's changing is that a proportion of them voted Brexit and have now moved on to voting Tory.

It's a problem for the left that the people we think we're about helping are mostly disengaged. Just as in the US the Democrats look for votes from schoolteachers more thantrailer parks, in Britain Labour has rarely done much to try to mobilise the very poor, simply because it's so difficult - I often puzzled over it, and tried many times to interest that estate, but they were perfectly politely just not interested. At election time, it was always more promising to canvass an area with more people in work and getting something out of life.

I'm not proud of it, and one can argue that if the Tories win desperate Northern seats we had it coming. But I don't think they'll be happy with a Tory government either. A grim life is a grim life, and the differences that we all make are on the margins.

It would be interesting (from an election anorak point of view) to be in Australia on election day in a similar sort of place and watching almost everyone going to vote under their compulsory voting system.

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

If I am annoying you Malc G I know I am doing something right

malcolmg said:

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.

That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.

Acknowledge the existence and validity of.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Casino_Royale said:

On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.

One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.

That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.

Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.

Absolutely.

The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off

Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them

Disagree. It was a horrible interview, but because Boris deliberately filibusters Marr had no choice but to interrupt.

That is pure bias. Marr has been widely condemned for his interview and I wanted Boris put under pressure but not by a hysterical interviewer

I would just like to put on record that I have great reservations about Boris and in common with the vast majority I wish the choice was not between Boris or Corbyn

Corbyn is the reason I support Boris and the only reason. It is greater than Brexit for me

I hope if Boris wins he introduces more liberal policies and depending on his majority agrees a sensible FTA and the country moves the dial past 24 x 7 Brexit controversies and Corbyn is consigned to history

Corbyn is awful. Boris is awful. Only Boris can win a majority and put in place his plan to devastate the economy via no deal. Corbyn never will have the numbers to turn us into a Russian satellite state.

noneoftheabove said:

MarqueeMark said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Casino_Royale said:

On topic, fascinating digest by Cyclefree. Very very interesting. Thank you for writing it.

One point that struck me: in engaging with voters to challenge them interviewers have an important to interrogate, as well as politicians do to explain. But, interviewers need to understand that interrogation doesn’t mean going aggressively for a “gotcha” moment but to actually get them to clarify and explain all those arguments for the benefit of the viewers.

That means they too need to take their own agendas off the table and their egos out of the equation.

Completely agree with this. We have swung from, “Is there anything that you want to add, Minister?” to a level of hyper aggression where letting your interviewee get a word in edge ways is regarded as a weakness. It would be useful to hear what politicians actually think when not being harranged so we have some idea of what they would actually do if we elect them. The media have not had a good campaign.

Absolutely.

The media have been shocking and I do not watch the debates, other than Boris v Corbyn, just as I avoid question time as they just switch most sane people off

Marr was so bad last sunday v Boris my wife walked out in utter disgust at his constant harranguing. I wanted to see Boris put under pressure and hear his answers but in the end it was another example of the interviewer thinking it was all about them

Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.

If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.

Because the electorate really need that information after the election, right?
Born to rule arrogance.

Amazing to hear the establishment fanboys say not only is Brexit the fault of remainers yesterday, but today we find out the reason we dont know what the PM thinks is because of Marr, not because he refuses to do serious interviews and debates, and when he does speak he invariably tells people what is to his advantage rather than his real thoughts.

You saying Marr is not a serious interview?

Id put facing him as about average. Maybe harder than Richard and Judy, much easier than Neill, Paxman, Ridge, Boulton, Burley or Sackur.

Richard can be quite the terrier though. He won't let go of a point....

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

If I am annoying you Malc G I know I am doing something right

You are not annoying me HYUFD but I have a much more compassionate attitude to helping the poor than you seem to

Ms Cyclefree,

An interesting take, and I'd agree he comes across as an avuncular uncle-figure, but there was one telling sentence … "It was notable that Clarke admitted that his generation of politicians had been perhaps too smug and confident about what they were doing and had not noticed what was happening under their noses."

I may have missed it, but there was no mention of listening to the voters, only of convincing them. Politicians are convinced they are right, which makes them impervious to learning from mistakes. Even facts don't matter if they conflict with their world view.

It's a pity the media prefers partisan voices, and worse, angry ones. The other side is evil because they disagree. I think Corbyn means well at heart - he can't help being barmy. Scientist can be biased and often are, but their mistakes eventually come back to embarrass them.

Politicians never admit mistakes. If Brexit sees our economy race along, compared to the EU, Remainers will still claim it is lower than it would have been. If Jezza becomes PM and we turn into Venezuela, it will be the fault of the Tories, or the gnomes of Zurich, or Farmer Jones, or more likely, the USA. When you are perfect, you never make mistakes, do you?

With education has come cynicism and MPs have yet to catch up.

Dura_Ace said:

Nigelb said:

Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet.
Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.

The "vegan" interior was a £3k option on my Taycan. Porsche know which way the wind is blowing.

Conspicuous consumption Dura_Ace? I`m surprised at you. You winding us up?

There was a time when Ken Clarke was strongly disliked by anyone who wasn't a Conservative, particularly when he was a cigar-smoking Health Secretary at a time when there was a big campaign to get people to stop smoking. He was also criticised for being overweight at that time as well IIRC.

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

As I expected and asked last week, we’re now starting to get the luvvies (Hugh Grant and a couple of Lefty stand-up comics) standing up and saying we’re all going to hell in a handcart if we don’t kick the Tories out.

The Guardian letter can only be days away.

Dear Ashfield, Grimsby, West Bromwich, Stoke plebs,

I know in your ignorance you have already voted for Brexit please do not compound the problem by giving Boris Johnson a majority. Instead please vote for your left liberal woke candidate we approve of and go back to voting Labour like you usually do and then we can conveniently ignore you for the rest of the Parliament.

Yours sincerely,

Hugh Grant and other luvvies,

Islington, Hampstead etc

It clearly makes them feel better, if nothing else.

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.

That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.

You know Maic, in years gone by I used to organise a xmas float going round town and it is a fact that in the council estates the families emptied their pockets into the collecting tins and in the wealthy areas most hid behind their curtains. It was the ordinary folk who could least afford it who gave the most

My wife was talking about a school in the Dales last night. As an aside for those that don't know as it's essential to the story - school trips for an educational purpose can not request payment just ask for donations.

The trip is currently £400 short as all the poorer parents have paid but those with the fancier cars haven't. Let's just say it's not gone down well in the local villages.

Now this trip will go ahead but with that shortfall it will be the last one.

Just don't take the kids who's parents refused to pay?

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.

That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.

You know Maic, in years gone by I used to organise a xmas float going round town and it is a fact that in the council estates the families emptied their pockets into the collecting tins and in the wealthy areas most hid behind their curtains. It was the ordinary folk who could least afford it who gave the most

My wife was talking about a school in the Dales last night. As an aside for those that don't know as it's essential to the story - school trips for an educational purpose can not request payment just ask for donations.

The trip is currently £400 short as all the poorer parents have paid but those with the fancier cars haven't. Let's just say it's not gone down well in the local villages.

Now this trip will go ahead but with that shortfall it will be the last one.

As chairman of the PTA, years ago I should say, it was just the same

IshmaelZ said:

Silly sloganeering. If you have finite assets, to allocate more to those with less you necessarily have to take from those with more. There's local pockets across which that is not necessarily true, and special rules might temporarily apply to pretendy assets like money, but overall it cannot not be the case.

They seem to manage a more balanced society in the Nordic countries. Their rich people appear to be happy being just wealthy rather than wanting to have it all and have everybody else poor. The UK is a sh**hole.

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

Indeed

MarqueeMark said:

noneoftheabove said:

MarqueeMark said:

noneoftheabove said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Marr had a very bad day at the office last Sunday.

If I were Boris, I would now offer Andrew Neil a one hour interview in early January, to discuss all aspects of his programme in Government, his Cabinet, Brexit, the BBC - all in a calm post-election atmosphere where the need for gotcha moments has greatly diminshed - and they can actually get down to a meaningful talk.

Because the electorate really need that information after the election, right?
Born to rule arrogance.

Amazing to hear the establishment fanboys say not only is Brexit the fault of remainers yesterday, but today we find out the reason we dont know what the PM thinks is because of Marr, not because he refuses to do serious interviews and debates, and when he does speak he invariably tells people what is to his advantage rather than his real thoughts.

You saying Marr is not a serious interview?

Id put facing him as about average. Maybe harder than Richard and Judy, much easier than Neill, Paxman, Ridge, Boulton, Burley or Sackur.

Richard can be quite the terrier though. He won't let go of a point....

That’s fair, he’s very good at the unexpectedly difficult question and knows a crap politician’s non-answer when he hears it - I believe he was a serious journalist in a previous life. See also Emma Barnett for a similar style.
Neither are of the calibre of Andrew Neil or Stephen Sackur though.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.

That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.

You know Maic, in years gone by I used to organise a xmas float going round town and it is a fact that in the council estates the families emptied their pockets into the collecting tins and in the wealthy areas most hid behind their curtains. It was the ordinary folk who could least afford it who gave the most

My wife was talking about a school in the Dales last night. As an aside for those that don't know as it's essential to the story - school trips for an educational purpose can not request payment just ask for donations.

The trip is currently £400 short as all the poorer parents have paid but those with the fancier cars haven't. Let's just say it's not gone down well in the local villages.

Now this trip will go ahead but with that shortfall it will be the last one.

As chairman of the PTA, years ago I should say, it was just the same

As a school Governor it was the same. One person was so bad I joked that if he paid enough I would say it was sponsored by his company. As it was a tax deductible item he did actually pay for an entire trip (which allowed us to write what was previously owed off).

Nigelb said:

Casino_Royale said:

NorthernPowerhouse said:

SunnyJim said:

Mysticrose said:

Just listen to yourself.
When this election is over, whether right or left win or a combination, the climate will still be a central issue and everyone needs to listen and change.

Challenging candidates with awkward questions is democracy (and activism) at its best.
Hysterical shrieking to drown out opponents in a public forum may provide the hard of thinking with a fleeting hit of dopamine but will alienate the 99.9% who aren't obsessing about the subject.
View the protesters getting pasted round the tube platform by commuters the other week as a case in point.

And ironically they’re not that interested in science either. I’ve certainly learnt over the last year or so, especially since the IPCC special report and the hysteria following it is that many of those claiming to be environmentalists are often very poorly informed, and when their assumptions are challenged react in a way a devoted religious person reacts when you poke holes in what they see as their core belief system.

Indeed, including the new religion of Veganism.
The BBC surprised me by publishing this well-balanced piece including passages from some very respected scientists and analysts who cast serious doubt on the “meat is bad for the environment” orthodoxy:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/articles/meat_environment

Current global meat production is undoubtedly bad for the planet.
Without greatly reducing consumption, non-intensively farmed grass fed ruminants would not get anywhere near supplying current demand. At the moment, it’s increasing.

It’s far more complex than that, and really orientated around all 10 billion people in the world moving to a very similar (western skewed) diet.

Instead, we should take far greater interest in the vernacular. For example, here in the UK, moderate amounts of grass-fed lamb and beef from Welsh and Scottish uplands, and the English north, isn’t really a problem whereas we should probably be flying in a few less daily planeloads of avocados and creating pressure in Malaysia and Brazil to clear rainforest for soy.

Mysticrose said:

It's well worth watching this brief Michael Crick report on Claire Wright in East Devon. Apart from anything else, it indicates how savvy people are now on Tactical Voting. This will be one of THE stories of this election.

https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv/the-michael-crick-report/781/our-man-visits-tory-held-exmouth-to-assess-the-threat-of-the-independents

I expect others are equally savvy in voting to keep Corbyn out.

Mysticrose said:

It's well worth watching this brief Michael Crick report on Claire Wright in East Devon. Apart from anything else, it indicates how savvy people are now on Tactical Voting. This will be one of THE stories of this election.

https://www.mailplus.co.uk/tv/the-michael-crick-report/781/our-man-visits-tory-held-exmouth-to-assess-the-threat-of-the-independents

There was a discussion on 5 live this morning and a polling expert put it at 9% of the total vote

rcs1000 said:

Gasman said:

I hadn't realised Macmillan was so far ahead of his time, applying to join an organisation that wouldn't exist until after he had died.

Pedantic maybe, but important to remember that the EU is not the same as the EEC, or the EC. The status quo is rarely on offer for long.

The core principle, of ever closer union, was there from the start. Remember Hugh Gaitskell?

The government pamphlet for the referendum didn't mention ever closer union
http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm

Big_G_NorthWales said:

eek said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

noneoftheabove said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

For once, (and it is very rare!), I am on HYUFDs side, at least kind of. Why should the rich in the UK recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the UK if the rich in the world (i.e. the median in UK) arent willing to recognise their fortune and responsibilities to the poor in the world.

That is just puerile bollox, WTF does "recognise" mean. You halfwit , I bet the 14M give more to charity than the 6 tossers.

You know Maic, in years gone by I used to organise a xmas float going round town and it is a fact that in the council estates the families emptied their pockets into the collecting tins and in the wealthy areas most hid behind their curtains. It was the ordinary folk who could least afford it who gave the most

My wife was talking about a school in the Dales last night. As an aside for those that don't know as it's essential to the story - school trips for an educational purpose can not request payment just ask for donations.

The trip is currently £400 short as all the poorer parents have paid but those with the fancier cars haven't. Let's just say it's not gone down well in the local villages.

Now this trip will go ahead but with that shortfall it will be the last one.

As chairman of the PTA, years ago I should say, it was just the same

That's why the rich need to be taxed, you'd never get them to part with their filthy lucre otherwise.

TimT said:

RobD said:

ReggieCide said:

RobD said:

Squeaky bum time for the SNP? Black dashed is 2017, gold is 2019. National polls only so rounding is an issue!

Difficult to tell what the election is about up there. I have good friends up there, traditional labour but hating the SNP. They live in Glasgow. Where to go?

This might be showing that pollsters are doing a better job. In 2017 they got 3.1% nationally, and the latest Scottish polls show them to be in a similar position to last time.

@ RobD Thanks for the graphs you post. It struck me that a useful additional layer of analysis, rather than just looking at the voting intentions and the gap, might be a chart of the rate of Labour's closing the gap, 2017 vs now.

@TimT - not sure what you mean by this. You want the derivative of the lead curve?

Slackbladder said:

IshmaelZ said:

Silly sloganeering. If you have finite assets, to allocate more to those with less you necessarily have to take from those with more. There's local pockets across which that is not necessarily true, and special rules might temporarily apply to pretendy assets like money, but overall it cannot not be the case.

'if you have finite assets' is the key. The point is if those with more generate more assets themselves, then cutting them down cuts everyone down.

This sounds rather reminiscent of an inversion of the trickle-down theory. This model of understanding has not worked, as US and UK social and economic data show since the 1980s compared to Germany and Scandinavia.

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

CD13 said:

Ms Cyclefree,

An interesting take, and I'd agree he comes across as an avuncular uncle-figure, but there was one telling sentence … "It was notable that Clarke admitted that his generation of politicians had been perhaps too smug and confident about what they were doing and had not noticed what was happening under their noses."

I may have missed it, but there was no mention of listening to the voters, only of convincing them. Politicians are convinced they are right, which makes them impervious to learning from mistakes. Even facts don't matter if they conflict with their world view.

It's a pity the media prefers partisan voices, and worse, angry ones. The other side is evil because they disagree. I think Corbyn means well at heart - he can't help being barmy. Scientist can be biased and often are, but their mistakes eventually come back to embarrass them.

Politicians never admit mistakes. If Brexit sees our economy race along, compared to the EU, Remainers will still claim it is lower than it would have been. If Jezza becomes PM and we turn into Venezuela, it will be the fault of the Tories, or the gnomes of Zurich, or Farmer Jones, or more likely, the USA. When you are perfect, you never make mistakes, do you?

With education has come cynicism and MPs have yet to catch up.

The problem with listening to voters is that we want better services and less taxation, we want localisation but no postcode lottery, sometimes we have to be led and convinced about what is practical not just desirable.
Johnson has gone for the listening approach, managing by opinion poll and promising what people want to hear. We shall see if it is successful but I think it will be a disaster.

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

If you actually think that I honestly feel sorry for you. I have never met a socialist who has anything other than a burning desire to end the scourge of poverty once and for all.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

If you actually think that I honestly feel sorry for you. I have never met a socialist who has anything other than a burning desire to end the scourge of poverty once and for all.

Seems interesting that Labour's policies are so focused on the middle class rather than people in poverty.

malcolmg said:

Went well for the sub regional London Party manager's last night. Three of them screaming at her and absolutely trounced.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18077579.online-poll-think-won-stv-leaders-debate/?ref=twtrec

PS: Cheek to call them party leaders when they are just region office managers of London parties, none of them exist as real political Scottish parties , they just steal the "Scottish" to pretend they have any Scottish content.

Actually Nicola, who has done well in the UK debates, got gubbed in the Scottish version last night as the Scottish leaders know all about her domestic record. Having said that no-one will have watched it.
Report here: https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/1904632/stv-debate-analysis-less-than-comfortable-experience-for-sturgeon-as-she-battles-scottish-rivals/

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

Hence Tax Credits, where the majority of the population have to pay taxes then fill in forms to be allowed to get some of it back again. Far better to just reduce the tax rate in the first place.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

If you actually think that I honestly feel sorry for you. I have never met a socialist who has anything other than a burning desire to end the scourge of poverty once and for all.

8% unemployment in 2010, 4% now, wages also going up.

Labour's record speaks for itself

RobD said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

If you actually think that I honestly feel sorry for you. I have never met a socialist who has anything other than a burning desire to end the scourge of poverty once and for all.

Seems interesting that Labour's policies are so focused on the middle class rather than people in poverty.

Except they're not.

On message: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1202156105297776640?s=20

Con maj has moved from 1.45 to 1.43 in just the last few minutes.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311

FrancisUrquhart said:

Betfair moving in again, that's now 10 points in a day. Have we missed a new poll or has somebody seen the YouGov MRP early?

It's probably the fact that Labour are running out of time to close the gap. The Tories are still 10% to 11% ahead in most of the polling averages.

CD13 said:

Mr Above,

"The problem with listening to voters is that we want better services and less taxation, "

They do, but they are far more sensible then you imagine. They realise it has to be practicable. They also have biases, like politicians, and dislike being taken for fools. When politicians talk about communication with voters, they mean explaining why they are wrong. They may listen but they have no intention of hearing.

Voters arent sensible. Look at who we have chosen, our leaders on all sides are getting progressively worse. The changes we wanted, like electing party leaders one person one vote, rather than by those who know and work with them, have their career prospects in the hands of their leader, are all part of the journey we have been on making our politics and our country worse.
I would much prefer leaders willing to lead and argue than politicians trying to please the crowd.

Sandpit said:

Hence Tax Credits, where the majority of the population have to pay taxes then fill in forms to be allowed to get some of it back again. Far better to just reduce the tax rate in the first place.

Not really, you can't ask companies to collect detailed information about living (and caring) commitments to determine the amount of tax to be paid.

The only way around it would be to move towards a different tax system where income tax and NI was paid by the employee rather than deducted by the employer. As that approach is common in the EU I really can't see it being implemented by the Tories and HMRC like the way money is paid at the moment.

Labour must be green with envy seeing Boris getting all the media coverage this morning meeting and welcoming world leaders

Andy_JS said:

Con maj has moved from 1.45 to 1.43 in just the last few minutes.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311

Still not down to the 1.39 it was a week ago

Popcorn at the ready?

https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1202158196791664646?s=20

Andy_JS said:

Con maj has moved from 1.45 to 1.43 in just the last few minutes.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311

Now 1.41....And remember it now takes proper money to shift it.

CarlottaVance said:

Popcorn at the ready?

https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1202158196791664646?s=20

Alien vs Predator....

FrancisUrquhart said:

Andy_JS said:

Con maj has moved from 1.45 to 1.43 in just the last few minutes.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311

Now 1.41....And remember it now takes proper money to shift it.

Do large companies bet using Betfair Exchange? Never considered the idea before.

eek said:

Sandpit said:

Hence Tax Credits, where the majority of the population have to pay taxes then fill in forms to be allowed to get some of it back again. Far better to just reduce the tax rate in the first place.

Not really, you can't ask companies to collect detailed information about living (and caring) commitments to determine the amount of tax to be paid.

The only way around it would be to move towards a different tax system where income tax and NI was paid by the employee rather than deducted by the employer. As that approach is common in the EU I really can't see it being implemented by the Tories and HMRC like the way money is paid at the moment.

I’d love to see a system where people have to pay their own taxes. Most people in the US have to write a cheque for the taxman every year, that should focus the mind somewhat towards what government does with the money.
Employer NI needs to be scrapped, it’s quite literally a tax on jobs.

1.4 now.

9.8 million USD has been traded on the betfair exchange for the election!

Slackbladder said:

Andy_JS said:

Con maj has moved from 1.45 to 1.43 in just the last few minutes.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311

Thats fallen a fair bit in the last few days from 1.5+ hasn't it. Realisation that the 2017 pattern isn't being followed?

Strangely we got the Sunday polls that weren't bad for the Tories and it drifted out to 1.54, we got new ones that were decent for Tories Monday a little movement in, but much increased liquidity. Now proper movement.

Anyone have a suggestion as to why Con Majority seems to be rising fast in the bookies odds today?

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

HYUFD said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

HYUFD said:

Benpointer said:

Re "Spreading the Wealth". There's some way to go.

The six (SIX!) wealthiest people in this country own more than the 13.9m poorest.

And those with median wealth in the UK are wealthier than 90% of the world's population, so what

Only a rich Tory could come out with crap like that

Very poor from HYUFD

Morning G, He is the type that give the Tories such a bad name.

We are in the same party but are very different, HYUFD is on the right, I am on the left of the party

He makes Attila the Hun look like a leftie, very sad. He better hope he does not hit a bump in life I doubt he could cope, one day he will realise that having money and despising the poor is not all life is about.

I don't despise the poor I want to make them richer, socialists love poverty as poorer welfare dependent voters vote Labour

It is moving to the employed voting Labour and those on state benefits and social security voting Tory.

No most private sector workers and those with private pensions and owner occupiers vote Tory, most on benefits and welfare dependent and most public sector workers vote Labour

I know you like your polls so ICM with the Tories leading 42-32 has:

Full time: Tory 33 Labour 30
Part time: Tory 27 Labour 33
Which makes combined working: Tory 31 Labour 31

It is retired (50:15) which gives Tories the big lead. Over 55% of social security goes to pensioners. The Tories are the party of state handouts for votes.

https://www.icmunlimited.com/our-work/icm-voting-intentions-poll-general-election-2019-3/