politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Oh Jeremy Corbyn
Options
Comments
-
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:2 -
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
ah - yesrcs1000 said:
That clustering won't feed into the trend, because all those polls were from the same pollster - USC Dornsife - and only the latest one will count for the purpose of the poll of polls.Malmesbury said:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ is instructive - as everrcs1000 said:
Why isn't Fox News showing different results, then?contrarian said:Trump's odds on betfair is essentially the human nature versus objectivity bet, isn;t it?
The bet is that polling organisations won't serve up favourable polls for Trump to paymasters for whom he is a total and complete anathema. a figure of visceral hatred.
Just look at their coverage for ten minutes, CNN, CNBC etc.
They not ready for those polls. They just do not compute.
Fox news, of course, being the major exception, I fully accept.
Meanwhile the Daily Express (!) has a poll showing Trump cruising it. Not even I believe that one.
And even One America News, when it commissioned a poll, ended up pulling it, because it didn't show the numbers expected.
There is a plethora of press from all sides of the political spectrum in the US. There have also been polls in the US from people like Morning Consult, using consistent methodology, for measuring satisfaction. And they all also show very similar results.
But you have to assume that (a) even the polls from people like Siena College are biased, despite the lack of financial incentive (b) polls commissioned by right leaning pollsters are also biased against Trump, and (c) there's no one who's thinking "if I get this right and everyone else gets it wrong, I'll make an absolute fortune selling my services to hedge funds next time around."
I'm also struggling to see - given crosstabs are public from most pollsters (although not some, like Trafalgar) - how they would execute this. Unless you think they are not just choosing an unrepresentative demographic, but actually throwing responses away they don't like.
Occam's razor applies here. Whatever requires the fewer assumptions (and the least collusion) is more likely to be correct?
(Indeed, I'm going to put my cards on the table. I think the pollsters were burnt in 2016, and don't want to get it wrong overstating the Democrats in 2020. So even though Registered Republicans are now just 28% of the electorate, down from 40% at the time of Bush Sr, I challenge you to find any poll weighting that has them down in the 20s. Now, I know their reasoning, and it makes sense, - that Republicans are much more enthused. But if I were going to bet on a polling error, I'd bet on it being the other way.)
There is a considerable scatter. But this is interesting -
Look at the clustering in recent days that hasn't fed into the trend, yet.1 -
Weren't we told Austerity was dead and wouldn't be coming back?CorrectHorseBattery said:
This tired old "cut my taxes and slash services" response is almost a knee-jerk reaction to any economic change.
If things are going well, cut taxes (we can afford to) - if things are going badly, cut taxes and public spending (it's time those overpaid public sector bureaucrats felt a bit of pain too).1 -
On topic. It's important to remember that the key claim of the Corbynistas is sabotage rather than insubordination. It's not enough to show that in an utterly dysfunctional party there were different groups of people using the rules to sign off different things because they believed the other lot were useless, but rather they need to prove it was done with malice rather than to save seats. Their case is hugely weakened by the complete mess they made of things when they were in total control.
0 -
4-5 months is plenty of time for a rethink, especially now, if it would even happen (I doubt Boris would go for it).stodge said:
0 -
I accidentally fell into a QAnon hell hole the other day.williamglenn said:
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apparently the Jews created the coronavirus to help the Muslims takeover the world.
In return the Muslims will provide the Jews with children to kill/eat.
The problems in Palestine are just a smoke screen to make the world think Jews and Muslims hate each other.3 -
Truly devious.TheScreamingEagles said:
I accidentally fell into a QAnon hell hole the other day.williamglenn said:
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apparently the Jews created the coronavirus to help the Muslims takeover the world.
In return the Muslims will provide the Jews with children to kill/eat.
The problems in Palestine are just a smoke screen to make the world think Jews and Muslims hate each other.0 -
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:0 -
I guess they are taking lessons from the Labour party.
https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/13001330400107356180 -
You should tell them that pineapple on pizza is a symbol of the unholy alliance.TheScreamingEagles said:
I accidentally fell into a QAnon hell hole the other day.williamglenn said:
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apparently the Jews created the coronavirus to help the Muslims takeover the world.
In return the Muslims will provide the Jews with children to kill/eat.
The problems in Palestine are just a smoke screen to make the world think Jews and Muslims hate each other.0 -
Having to pay a bit more capital gains tax is hardly austerity.stodge said:
Weren't we told Austerity was dead and wouldn't be coming back?CorrectHorseBattery said:
This tired old "cut my taxes and slash services" response is almost a knee-jerk reaction to any economic change.
If things are going well, cut taxes (we can afford to) - if things are going badly, cut taxes and public spending (it's time those overpaid public sector bureaucrats felt a bit of pain too).0 -
I was going to but I'm so angry at the Telegraph for falling for the QAnon bullshit.williamglenn said:
You should tell them that pineapple on pizza is a symbol of the unholy alliance.TheScreamingEagles said:
I accidentally fell into a QAnon hell hole the other day.williamglenn said:
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apparently the Jews created the coronavirus to help the Muslims takeover the world.
In return the Muslims will provide the Jews with children to kill/eat.
The problems in Palestine are just a smoke screen to make the world think Jews and Muslims hate each other.0 -
FYI people were having a bit of a freak out about Telegraph article about pedophile secret code. Calling it QAnon crap. But the things is it is more twisted and deeper than that.TheScreamingEagles said:
The pedophiles on 4chan do indeed use "pizza" as a code word for child pornography. Then, when the Podesta emails were released some wag on 4chan, exposed to the pizza terminology, decided that every Podesta email that referenced pizza actually went child porn.
That's how Pizzagate was born. Pizzagate is, of course, part of QAnon cannon.0 -
As these people spiral the plughole, they get closer and closer to the true source of their garbage....kle4 said:
Truly devious.TheScreamingEagles said:
I accidentally fell into a QAnon hell hole the other day.williamglenn said:
I watched one of the clips on Twitter and David Icke's speech seemed to consist of shouting "Freedom!" like a demented Mel Gibson impersonator.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apparently the Jews created the coronavirus to help the Muslims takeover the world.
In return the Muslims will provide the Jews with children to kill/eat.
The problems in Palestine are just a smoke screen to make the world think Jews and Muslims hate each other.0 -
Would have been too obvious. Putin too clever for that. Runs his agent with subtlety and skill. ☺Malmesbury said:
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:0 -
Who are we talking about then? A number of Maastricht rebels had the whip withdrawn but were back in time for the election.Philip_Thompson said:
It is true.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is not actually true, is it?Charles said:
Cyclefree agreed with MajorPhilip_Thompson said:
Major expelled everyone who didn't vote for Maastricht. How is that any different at all to Boris expelling those who didn't vote for his deal in the last Parliament?Cyclefree said:
They sacked them. They didn’t expel them from the party.DAlexander said:
This is pretty standard behaviour for politicians isn't it?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm talking about being petulant towards people who disagree with them, for example Julian Lewis.DAlexander said:"this is the sort of behaviour you’d expect from Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings"
Not really, since those two seem pretty good at winning elections.
May got rid of Osborne when she got in and Gordon Brown wasn't exactly shy of getting rid of people he didn't like.
It was pure spite by the PM. Contrast it with how he defends others who break the rules - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/07/16/spotting-the-difference-what-really-matters-to-johnson-when-deciding-who-is-in-or-out/.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels#Rebels_who_had_whip_withdrawn1 -
It's exactly what you'd expect from the self-styled "Taxpayers Alliance".CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
I thought Zogby went out of business after it called Obama/Romney wrong?stodge said:
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/sqqliantmw/econTabReport.pdfcontrarian said:https://zogbyanalytics.com/news/952-the-zogby-poll-new-trump-job-approval-numbers
Jeez look at this poll from Zogby. Trump is home and dry if this is in any way correct.
its funny though. Even I don;t like posting good polls for Trump.
Okay - the approval numbers are on Page 279. White voters approve of Trump 51-48 (+3). Black voters split 22-73 (-51), Hispanic voters split 33-62 (-29).
In terms of voting intention, Whites vote 48-44 for Trump, Black voters are 78-12 for Biden, Hispanic voters 57-27 for Biden.
The Zogby numbers for White and Hispanic voters are close but that doesn't mean those who "approve" of Trump are minded to vote for him.
To conclude from these approval numbers that Trump is "home and dry" is absurd.0 -
Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?0 -
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?3 -
There is a very long history in revolutionaryMJW said:On topic. It's important to remember that the key claim of the Corbynistas is sabotage rather than insubordination. It's not enough to show that in an utterly dysfunctional party there were different groups of people using the rules to sign off different things because they believed the other lot were useless, but rather they need to prove it was done with malice rather than to save seats. Their case is hugely weakened by the complete mess they made of things when they were in total control.
ideologyhorseshit of declaring that "sabotage" is the only reason that The True Way has failed.
1 -
Putin’s agenda is sowing discord within the US and mistrust between the US and its european allies. So far his backing Trump is paying off handsomely.Malmesbury said:
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:1 -
The data subsequent to the decision suggests that they have messed up badly.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?0 -
@williamglenn is mistaken on this.eristdoof said:
It caused a significant increase in house prices over those few months, at the same time as the economy was going into decline. House prices in the south east and especially Greater London were already somewhat overpriced. The combination of these three things lead to a house price crash that spread mich further than the SE. The housing problem persisted some years and the words negative equity became a common.kjh said:
According to Wikipedia when the multiple mortgage tax relief withdrawal was announced it caused a sharp increase in house prices to beat the deadline. Lawson subsequently stated he regretted not making it effective from budget day.DavidL said:
That makes no sense. Its not as if MIRAS was locked in for those who bought before a particular date. It was removed for everyone from a date. Pre-announcing it meant people could work out what their mortgage would be when it was gone and whether they could afford the house. This caused a modest dampening to the market not a boom or a subsequent bust.williamglenn said:
He preannounced it which accelerated the boom and then caused a subsequent bust.DavidL said:
Lawson salami sliced it and at a time of rapidly rising house prices (which the government was seeking to cool) it had minimal impact.kjh said:
Also replying to @contrarian who basically posted the same.rottenborough said:
CGT on primary residence would end Sunak's chances of being elected Tory leader within about five seconds.kjh said:
Careful Matt, I brought this up a few weeks ago and got absolutely minced.MattW said:
Some interesting ideas.Casino_Royale said:
The Sunday Times is reporting this differently - with all pensions relief given at 30% thus higher than the basic rate but lower than the higher rate thus avoiding the obvious headlines of either.Black_Rook said:
If they ramp up IHT or lower the thresholds then I'll be surprised - in a good way. But I doubt that they will. Going after estates enrages both stickbangers and their heirs in a way almost nothing else will, and is political nuclear death (as Theresa May discovered with the dementia tax.)Foxy said:
Looks like Rishi plans to copy Corbyns 2019 manifesto on tax. The cycle of copying Labours manifesto is accelerating.OldKingCole said:
Rishi (= Disraeli)??????Icarus said:
But who would they replace him with?Sandpit said:
He’ll be out of the door as quickly as Theresa May was, if he tries that one.IanB2 said:
Yesterday’s Briefing Room on R4 is well worth a listen. It included the suggestion that a thin last minute deal might be accompanied by an “implementation period” - during which everything would stay the same as currently. As a way to extend without actually extending.Foxy said:
Yes, Johnson copies Sturgeons homework then hands it in late.IanB2 said:This was the one that Boris f**ked up right at the beginning, with that rambling incoherent television address so memorably lampooned by Matt Lucas, which included announcing the supposedly clear new five-stage national alert system, and then saying we were currently at level three-and-a-half.
It never got off the runway.
The new system is: watch what Scotland is doing; wait a week during which ministers can build the suspense by denying or trashing the Scottish approach; do the same.
The SNP would not be anywhere near as popular without the Tories as a foil. It has been the cover for a lot of other failures.
It is Johnson's malevolent incompetence, as outlined in the header, that will end the United Kingdom.
The end of Transition is set to be a trainwreck too. What else can we expect?
Traditionally the Tories love a winner. And that goes above anything else.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1299811051924578304?s=09
The Government won't want to go after income tax, NI and VAT - too controversial, too obvious - with the caveat that they might scrap the preferential NI rate currently enjoyed by the self-employed, which is something that Sunak has hinted at in the past. They daren't touch the stickbangers, of course, so we are stuck with the wretched triple lock for the foreseeable. Hiking corporation tax at the same time as trying to get us through Brexit might be considered brave, in the Sir Humphrey sense.
Thus, the most obvious targets are tax reliefs enjoyed by the working age population. The prime candidate is a big Brown-style raid on pensions, this time normalising reliefs at the basic rate for all contributions. The FT was suggesting earlier in the year that CGT might be rounded up to a flat rate of 28% for all assets, and my husband was also speculating just yesterday that the annual contribution limit for ISAs might be cut in half.
Of course, the most radical measure would be to go all out with a wealth tax and pocket a one-off levy on all assets - savings, pensions, shares, property, the lot - which could potentially recoup the cost of all the extra borrowing taken out during the Plague. But I think it really would take a Corbyn Government to dare to try something like that!
I think something like that is likely.
But they need to stop ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the £25bn+ spent on the main residence relief CGT loophole.
That is worth more than all the rest put together.
You are probably right.
Can anyone remember the impact of removing Mortgage Tax Relief which I would have thought even more dramatic.
There was tax relief on interest payments on £30k of mortgage for each individual or married couple, and unmarried couples got 2 allowances so £60k. Discrimination *against* married couples.
Nigel Lawson announced in his budget speech on March 15 1988 that:
"Under the present system an unmarried couple can get twice as much mortgage interest relief as a married couple. This has attracted increasing—and justified—criticism. I propose to put a stop to it as from August this year. Thereafter, the £30,000 limit on mortgage interest relief will be related to the house or flat, irrespective of the number of borrowers. "
Interest rates were nearly 10% so it made a hell of a difference.
So unmarried couples went bonkers buying houses for the next 4 months, knowing that they would get a benefit of about £700-800 per year at a time when average full time salary was about £12000.
They knew precisely that they would benefit when they completed by 31 July.
House prices went up by 20% between Q1 and Q3 1988, and 25% that year. That was about 4x faster than either 1987 or 1989. (Nationwide)
0 -
How can that decision be messed up if it is based on a threshold? They can't know whether things will get worse or better in a country, the decision has to be made based on the numbers available at the time.IanB2 said:
The data subsequent to the decision suggests that they have messed up badly.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?0 -
But oil price = power for Putin. It's his number 1 thing. I can't see any way that he could let that slide.IanB2 said:
Putin’s agenda is sowing discord within the US and mistrust between the US and its european allies. So far his backing Trump is paying off handsomely.Malmesbury said:
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:0 -
It's intriguing - all the pollsters seem to be oversampling independents.stodge said:
The truth is probably somewhere between the two. The Economist/YouGov split is 37.5% Dem, 35.4% Ind and 27.1% Rep.Alistair said:Democracy Institute details
The national poll has a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percent at a 95 percent confidence interval. The national party identification turnout model is: Democrats = 37 percent; Republicans = 35 percent; and Independents = 28 percent.
Gallup latest poll has party identification
Dem: 31
GoP: 26
Ind: 41
In that poll Independents were 43-39 for Biden.
My gut is that when we are able to analyse the split in turnout, we'll see Registered Republicans at 33-34%, well up on their 28% of the electorate. Simply, those Republicans that remain *are* enthused by Trump, and it would be very naive not to admit that.
Democrats, on the other hand, will end up probably slight underperforming their number of Registered voters, and the Independent gap will be even bigger.
So, something like 38 D, 34 R, 27 I sounds like a perfectly plausible split.
0 -
In which case, he should want a really prosperous Europe (and everywhere else in the world) sucking in oil and gas exports.Malmesbury said:
But oil price = power for Putin. It's his number 1 thing. I can't see any way that he could let that slide.IanB2 said:
Putin’s agenda is sowing discord within the US and mistrust between the US and its european allies. So far his backing Trump is paying off handsomely.Malmesbury said:
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:
0 -
This is absolutely correct.MattW said:
@williamglenn is mistaken on this.eristdoof said:
It caused a significant increase in house prices over those few months, at the same time as the economy was going into decline. House prices in the south east and especially Greater London were already somewhat overpriced. The combination of these three things lead to a house price crash that spread mich further than the SE. The housing problem persisted some years and the words negative equity became a common.kjh said:
According to Wikipedia when the multiple mortgage tax relief withdrawal was announced it caused a sharp increase in house prices to beat the deadline. Lawson subsequently stated he regretted not making it effective from budget day.DavidL said:
That makes no sense. Its not as if MIRAS was locked in for those who bought before a particular date. It was removed for everyone from a date. Pre-announcing it meant people could work out what their mortgage would be when it was gone and whether they could afford the house. This caused a modest dampening to the market not a boom or a subsequent bust.williamglenn said:
He preannounced it which accelerated the boom and then caused a subsequent bust.DavidL said:
Lawson salami sliced it and at a time of rapidly rising house prices (which the government was seeking to cool) it had minimal impact.kjh said:
Also replying to @contrarian who basically posted the same.rottenborough said:
CGT on primary residence would end Sunak's chances of being elected Tory leader within about five seconds.kjh said:
Careful Matt, I brought this up a few weeks ago and got absolutely minced.MattW said:
Some interesting ideas.Casino_Royale said:
The Sunday Times is reporting this differently - with all pensions relief given at 30% thus higher than the basic rate but lower than the higher rate thus avoiding the obvious headlines of either.Black_Rook said:
If they ramp up IHT or lower the thresholds then I'll be surprised - in a good way. But I doubt that they will. Going after estates enrages both stickbangers and their heirs in a way almost nothing else will, and is political nuclear death (as Theresa May discovered with the dementia tax.)Foxy said:
Looks like Rishi plans to copy Corbyns 2019 manifesto on tax. The cycle of copying Labours manifesto is accelerating.OldKingCole said:
Rishi (= Disraeli)??????Icarus said:
But who would they replace him with?Sandpit said:
He’ll be out of the door as quickly as Theresa May was, if he tries that one.IanB2 said:
Yesterday’s Briefing Room on R4 is well worth a listen. It included the suggestion that a thin last minute deal might be accompanied by an “implementation period” - during which everything would stay the same as currently. As a way to extend without actually extending.Foxy said:
Yes, Johnson copies Sturgeons homework then hands it in late.IanB2 said:This was the one that Boris f**ked up right at the beginning, with that rambling incoherent television address so memorably lampooned by Matt Lucas, which included announcing the supposedly clear new five-stage national alert system, and then saying we were currently at level three-and-a-half.
It never got off the runway.
The new system is: watch what Scotland is doing; wait a week during which ministers can build the suspense by denying or trashing the Scottish approach; do the same.
The SNP would not be anywhere near as popular without the Tories as a foil. It has been the cover for a lot of other failures.
It is Johnson's malevolent incompetence, as outlined in the header, that will end the United Kingdom.
The end of Transition is set to be a trainwreck too. What else can we expect?
Traditionally the Tories love a winner. And that goes above anything else.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1299811051924578304?s=09
The Government won't want to go after income tax, NI and VAT - too controversial, too obvious - with the caveat that they might scrap the preferential NI rate currently enjoyed by the self-employed, which is something that Sunak has hinted at in the past. They daren't touch the stickbangers, of course, so we are stuck with the wretched triple lock for the foreseeable. Hiking corporation tax at the same time as trying to get us through Brexit might be considered brave, in the Sir Humphrey sense.
Thus, the most obvious targets are tax reliefs enjoyed by the working age population. The prime candidate is a big Brown-style raid on pensions, this time normalising reliefs at the basic rate for all contributions. The FT was suggesting earlier in the year that CGT might be rounded up to a flat rate of 28% for all assets, and my husband was also speculating just yesterday that the annual contribution limit for ISAs might be cut in half.
Of course, the most radical measure would be to go all out with a wealth tax and pocket a one-off levy on all assets - savings, pensions, shares, property, the lot - which could potentially recoup the cost of all the extra borrowing taken out during the Plague. But I think it really would take a Corbyn Government to dare to try something like that!
I think something like that is likely.
But they need to stop ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the £25bn+ spent on the main residence relief CGT loophole.
That is worth more than all the rest put together.
You are probably right.
Can anyone remember the impact of removing Mortgage Tax Relief which I would have thought even more dramatic.
There was tax relief on interest payments on £30k of mortgage for each individual or married couple, and unmarried couples got 2 allowances so £60k. Discrimination *against* married couples.
Nigel Lawson announced in his budget speech on March 15 1988 that:
"Under the present system an unmarried couple can get twice as much mortgage interest relief as a married couple. This has attracted increasing—and justified—criticism. I propose to put a stop to it as from August this year. Thereafter, the £30,000 limit on mortgage interest relief will be related to the house or flat, irrespective of the number of borrowers. "
Interest rates were nearly 10% so it made a hell of a difference.
So unmarried couples went bonkers buying houses for the next 4 months, knowing that they would get a benefit of about £700-800 per year at a time when average full time salary was about £12000.
They knew precisely that they would benefit when they completed by 31 July.
House prices went up by 20% between Q1 and Q3 1988, and 25% that year. That was about 4x faster than either 1987 or 1989. (Nationwide)0 -
7 day moving average, AIUI - which is why they don't knee jerk to one bad day's data. (Unlike some.....)RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?0 -
Did you mean to say that @DavidL was mistaken because that's exactly what I said? Lawson announced that the window to qualify for dual MIRAS was going to close which caused the boom to accelerate followed by a crash (which mainly affected the SE) because demand collapsed.MattW said:
@williamglenn is mistaken on this.eristdoof said:
It caused a significant increase in house prices over those few months, at the same time as the economy was going into decline. House prices in the south east and especially Greater London were already somewhat overpriced. The combination of these three things lead to a house price crash that spread mich further than the SE. The housing problem persisted some years and the words negative equity became a common.kjh said:
According to Wikipedia when the multiple mortgage tax relief withdrawal was announced it caused a sharp increase in house prices to beat the deadline. Lawson subsequently stated he regretted not making it effective from budget day.DavidL said:
That makes no sense. Its not as if MIRAS was locked in for those who bought before a particular date. It was removed for everyone from a date. Pre-announcing it meant people could work out what their mortgage would be when it was gone and whether they could afford the house. This caused a modest dampening to the market not a boom or a subsequent bust.williamglenn said:
He preannounced it which accelerated the boom and then caused a subsequent bust.DavidL said:
Lawson salami sliced it and at a time of rapidly rising house prices (which the government was seeking to cool) it had minimal impact.kjh said:
Also replying to @contrarian who basically posted the same.rottenborough said:
CGT on primary residence would end Sunak's chances of being elected Tory leader within about five seconds.kjh said:
Careful Matt, I brought this up a few weeks ago and got absolutely minced.MattW said:
Some interesting ideas.Casino_Royale said:
The Sunday Times is reporting this differently - with all pensions relief given at 30% thus higher than the basic rate but lower than the higher rate thus avoiding the obvious headlines of either.Black_Rook said:
If they ramp up IHT or lower the thresholds then I'll be surprised - in a good way. But I doubt that they will. Going after estates enrages both stickbangers and their heirs in a way almost nothing else will, and is political nuclear death (as Theresa May discovered with the dementia tax.)Foxy said:
Looks like Rishi plans to copy Corbyns 2019 manifesto on tax. The cycle of copying Labours manifesto is accelerating.OldKingCole said:
Rishi (= Disraeli)??????Icarus said:
But who would they replace him with?Sandpit said:
He’ll be out of the door as quickly as Theresa May was, if he tries that one.IanB2 said:
Yesterday’s Briefing Room on R4 is well worth a listen. It included the suggestion that a thin last minute deal might be accompanied by an “implementation period” - during which everything would stay the same as currently. As a way to extend without actually extending.Foxy said:
Yes, Johnson copies Sturgeons homework then hands it in late.IanB2 said:This was the one that Boris f**ked up right at the beginning, with that rambling incoherent television address so memorably lampooned by Matt Lucas, which included announcing the supposedly clear new five-stage national alert system, and then saying we were currently at level three-and-a-half.
It never got off the runway.
The new system is: watch what Scotland is doing; wait a week during which ministers can build the suspense by denying or trashing the Scottish approach; do the same.
The SNP would not be anywhere near as popular without the Tories as a foil. It has been the cover for a lot of other failures.
It is Johnson's malevolent incompetence, as outlined in the header, that will end the United Kingdom.
The end of Transition is set to be a trainwreck too. What else can we expect?
Traditionally the Tories love a winner. And that goes above anything else.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1299811051924578304?s=09
The Government won't want to go after income tax, NI and VAT - too controversial, too obvious - with the caveat that they might scrap the preferential NI rate currently enjoyed by the self-employed, which is something that Sunak has hinted at in the past. They daren't touch the stickbangers, of course, so we are stuck with the wretched triple lock for the foreseeable. Hiking corporation tax at the same time as trying to get us through Brexit might be considered brave, in the Sir Humphrey sense.
Thus, the most obvious targets are tax reliefs enjoyed by the working age population. The prime candidate is a big Brown-style raid on pensions, this time normalising reliefs at the basic rate for all contributions. The FT was suggesting earlier in the year that CGT might be rounded up to a flat rate of 28% for all assets, and my husband was also speculating just yesterday that the annual contribution limit for ISAs might be cut in half.
Of course, the most radical measure would be to go all out with a wealth tax and pocket a one-off levy on all assets - savings, pensions, shares, property, the lot - which could potentially recoup the cost of all the extra borrowing taken out during the Plague. But I think it really would take a Corbyn Government to dare to try something like that!
I think something like that is likely.
But they need to stop ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the £25bn+ spent on the main residence relief CGT loophole.
That is worth more than all the rest put together.
You are probably right.
Can anyone remember the impact of removing Mortgage Tax Relief which I would have thought even more dramatic.
There was tax relief on interest payments on £30k of mortgage for each individual or married couple, and unmarried couples got 2 allowances so £60k. Discrimination *against* married couples.
Nigel Lawson announced in his budget speech on March 15 1988 that:
"Under the present system an unmarried couple can get twice as much mortgage interest relief as a married couple. This has attracted increasing—and justified—criticism. I propose to put a stop to it as from August this year. Thereafter, the £30,000 limit on mortgage interest relief will be related to the house or flat, irrespective of the number of borrowers. "
Interest rates were nearly 10% so it made a hell of a difference.
So unmarried couples went bonkers buying houses for the next 4 months, knowing that they would get a benefit of about £700-800 per year at a time when average full time salary was about £12000.
They knew precisely that they would benefit when they completed by 31 July.
House prices went up by 20% between Q1 and Q3 1988, and 25% that year. That was about 4x faster than either 1987 or 1989. (Nationwide)0 -
I contacted my Tory MP about the governments approach to quarantine and he as good as admitted it is rubbish.0
-
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.1 -
Rupert Allason was the only one who abstained when it was a confidence vote (and he was overseas) and he had the whip removed for a year as a result. No other MPs rebelled in that vote and none at all voted with the opposition.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Who are we talking about then? A number of Maastricht rebels had the whip withdrawn but were back in time for the election.Philip_Thompson said:
It is true.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is not actually true, is it?Charles said:
Cyclefree agreed with MajorPhilip_Thompson said:
Major expelled everyone who didn't vote for Maastricht. How is that any different at all to Boris expelling those who didn't vote for his deal in the last Parliament?Cyclefree said:
They sacked them. They didn’t expel them from the party.DAlexander said:
This is pretty standard behaviour for politicians isn't it?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm talking about being petulant towards people who disagree with them, for example Julian Lewis.DAlexander said:"this is the sort of behaviour you’d expect from Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings"
Not really, since those two seem pretty good at winning elections.
May got rid of Osborne when she got in and Gordon Brown wasn't exactly shy of getting rid of people he didn't like.
It was pure spite by the PM. Contrast it with how he defends others who break the rules - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/07/16/spotting-the-difference-what-really-matters-to-johnson-when-deciding-who-is-in-or-out/.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Rebels#Rebels_who_had_whip_withdrawn
The 20 or so who voted with the opposition when Boris repeated Major's trick were more extreme than even the likes of Bill Cash etc who with Maastricht refused to rebel at that point.0 -
So you give the government a free pass on bollocks policy because the context is one of a global pandemic?Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.
No wonder the Cons are on 40%. And how are your knees?2 -
Quite amazed that this post has been flagged as spam!Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.0 -
On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.0 -
Apologies. Let me correct: *someone* was mistaken.williamglenn said:
Did you mean to say that @DavidL was mistaken because that's exactly what I said? Lawson announced that the window to qualify for dual MIRAS was going to close which caused the boom to accelerate followed by a crash (which mainly affected the SE) because demand collapsed.MattW said:
@williamglenn is mistaken on this.eristdoof said:
It caused a significant increase in house prices over those few months, at the same time as the economy was going into decline. House prices in the south east and especially Greater London were already somewhat overpriced. The combination of these three things lead to a house price crash that spread mich further than the SE. The housing problem persisted some years and the words negative equity became a common.kjh said:
According to Wikipedia when the multiple mortgage tax relief withdrawal was announced it caused a sharp increase in house prices to beat the deadline. Lawson subsequently stated he regretted not making it effective from budget day.DavidL said:
That makes no sense. Its not as if MIRAS was locked in for those who bought before a particular date. It was removed for everyone from a date. Pre-announcing it meant people could work out what their mortgage would be when it was gone and whether they could afford the house. This caused a modest dampening to the market not a boom or a subsequent bust.williamglenn said:
He preannounced it which accelerated the boom and then caused a subsequent bust.DavidL said:
Lawson salami sliced it and at a time of rapidly rising house prices (which the government was seeking to cool) it had minimal impact.kjh said:
Also replying to @contrarian who basically posted the same.rottenborough said:
CGT on primary residence would end Sunak's chances of being elected Tory leader within about five seconds.kjh said:
Careful Matt, I brought this up a few weeks ago and got absolutely minced.MattW said:
Some interesting ideas.Casino_Royale said:
The Sunday Times is reporting this differently - with all pensions relief given at 30% thus higher than the basic rate but lower than the higher rate thus avoiding the obvious headlines of either.Black_Rook said:
If they ramp up IHT or lower the thresholds then I'll be surprised - in a good way. But I doubt that they will. Going after estates enrages both stickbangers and their heirs in a way almost nothing else will, and is political nuclear death (as Theresa May discovered with the dementia tax.)Foxy said:
Looks like Rishi plans to copy Corbyns 2019 manifesto on tax. The cycle of copying Labours manifesto is accelerating.OldKingCole said:
Rishi (= Disraeli)??????Icarus said:
But who would they replace him with?Sandpit said:
He’ll be out of the door as quickly as Theresa May was, if he tries that one.IanB2 said:
Yesterday’s Briefing Room on R4 is well worth a listen. It included the suggestion that a thin last minute deal might be accompanied by an “implementation period” - during which everything would stay the same as currently. As a way to extend without actually extending.Foxy said:
Yes, Johnson copies Sturgeons homework then hands it in late.IanB2 said:This was the one that Boris f**ked up right at the beginning, with that rambling incoherent television address so memorably lampooned by Matt Lucas, which included announcing the supposedly clear new five-stage national alert system, and then saying we were currently at level three-and-a-half.
It never got off the runway.
The new system is: watch what Scotland is doing; wait a week during which ministers can build the suspense by denying or trashing the Scottish approach; do the same.
The SNP would not be anywhere near as popular without the Tories as a foil. It has been the cover for a lot of other failures.
It is Johnson's malevolent incompetence, as outlined in the header, that will end the United Kingdom.
The end of Transition is set to be a trainwreck too. What else can we expect?
Traditionally the Tories love a winner. And that goes above anything else.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1299811051924578304?s=09
The Government won't want to go after income tax, NI and VAT - too controversial, too obvious - with the caveat that they might scrap the preferential NI rate currently enjoyed by the self-employed, which is something that Sunak has hinted at in the past. They daren't touch the stickbangers, of course, so we are stuck with the wretched triple lock for the foreseeable. Hiking corporation tax at the same time as trying to get us through Brexit might be considered brave, in the Sir Humphrey sense.
Thus, the most obvious targets are tax reliefs enjoyed by the working age population. The prime candidate is a big Brown-style raid on pensions, this time normalising reliefs at the basic rate for all contributions. The FT was suggesting earlier in the year that CGT might be rounded up to a flat rate of 28% for all assets, and my husband was also speculating just yesterday that the annual contribution limit for ISAs might be cut in half.
Of course, the most radical measure would be to go all out with a wealth tax and pocket a one-off levy on all assets - savings, pensions, shares, property, the lot - which could potentially recoup the cost of all the extra borrowing taken out during the Plague. But I think it really would take a Corbyn Government to dare to try something like that!
I think something like that is likely.
But they need to stop ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the £25bn+ spent on the main residence relief CGT loophole.
That is worth more than all the rest put together.
You are probably right.
Can anyone remember the impact of removing Mortgage Tax Relief which I would have thought even more dramatic.
There was tax relief on interest payments on £30k of mortgage for each individual or married couple, and unmarried couples got 2 allowances so £60k. Discrimination *against* married couples.
Nigel Lawson announced in his budget speech on March 15 1988 that:
"Under the present system an unmarried couple can get twice as much mortgage interest relief as a married couple. This has attracted increasing—and justified—criticism. I propose to put a stop to it as from August this year. Thereafter, the £30,000 limit on mortgage interest relief will be related to the house or flat, irrespective of the number of borrowers. "
Interest rates were nearly 10% so it made a hell of a difference.
So unmarried couples went bonkers buying houses for the next 4 months, knowing that they would get a benefit of about £700-800 per year at a time when average full time salary was about £12000.
They knew precisely that they would benefit when they completed by 31 July.
House prices went up by 20% between Q1 and Q3 1988, and 25% that year. That was about 4x faster than either 1987 or 1989. (Nationwide)
It's all the fault of the nesting :-# . Difficult following indentation lines for several screens.
1 -
What are you talking about?TOPPING said:
So you give the government a free pass on bollocks policy because the context is one of a global pandemic?Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.
No wonder the Cons are on 40%. And how are your knees?
Quarantining foreign travellers during a pandemic is far better than going back to lockdowns.0 -
There is no consistency about the quarantines. It is all seat of the pants stuff. People are willing to put up, as we have seen, with all kinds of privations if they think there is a well thought out plan behind it.Philip_Thompson said:
What are you talking about?TOPPING said:
So you give the government a free pass on bollocks policy because the context is one of a global pandemic?Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.
No wonder the Cons are on 40%. And how are your knees?
Quarantining foreign travellers during a pandemic is far better than going back to lockdowns.
That is not the case here.2 -
One of the crazy things about MIRAS was that you got the tax rebate whether or not you paid tax. I bought a flat in Wimbledon with my brother, and got tax relief despite being a student at the time. My share mortgage was less than I had been paying in rent. I owned for 4 years, during which my share doubled in value. It was a deliberate housing bubble.MattW said:
@williamglenn is mistaken on this.eristdoof said:
It caused a significant increase in house prices over those few months, at the same time as the economy was going into decline. House prices in the south east and especially Greater London were already somewhat overpriced. The combination of these three things lead to a house price crash that spread mich further than the SE. The housing problem persisted some years and the words negative equity became a common.kjh said:
According to Wikipedia when the multiple mortgage tax relief withdrawal was announced it caused a sharp increase in house prices to beat the deadline. Lawson subsequently stated he regretted not making it effective from budget day.DavidL said:
That makes no sense. Its not as if MIRAS was locked in for those who bought before a particular date. It was removed for everyone from a date. Pre-announcing it meant people could work out what their mortgage would be when it was gone and whether they could afford the house. This caused a modest dampening to the market not a boom or a subsequent bust.williamglenn said:
He preannounced it which accelerated the boom and then caused a subsequent bust.DavidL said:
Lawson salami sliced it and at a time of rapidly rising house prices (which the government was seeking to cool) it had minimal impact.kjh said:
Also replying to @contrarian who basically posted the same.rottenborough said:
CGT on primary residence would end Sunak's chances of being elected Tory leader within about five seconds.kjh said:
Careful Matt, I brought this up a few weeks ago and got absolutely minced.MattW said:
Some interesting ideas.Casino_Royale said:
The Sunday Times is reporting this differently - with all pensions relief given at 30% thus higher than the basic rate but lower than the higher rate thus avoiding the obvious headlines of either.Black_Rook said:
If they ramp up IHT or lower the thresholds then I'll be surprised - in a good way. But I doubt that they will. Going after estates enrages both stickbangers and their heirs in a way almost nothing else will, and is political nuclear death (as Theresa May discovered with the dementia tax.)Foxy said:
Looks like Rishi plans to copy Corbyns 2019 manifesto on tax. The cycle of copying Labours manifesto is accelerating.OldKingCole said:
Rishi (= Disraeli)??????Icarus said:
But who would they replace him with?Sandpit said:
He’ll be out of the door as quickly as Theresa May was, if he tries that one.IanB2 said:
Yesterday’s Briefing Room on R4 is well worth a listen. It included the suggestion that a thin last minute deal might be accompanied by an “implementation period” - during which everything would stay the same as currently. As a way to extend without actually extending.Foxy said:
Yes, Johnson copies Sturgeons homework then hands it in late.IanB2 said:This was the one that Boris f**ked up right at the beginning, with that rambling incoherent television address so memorably lampooned by Matt Lucas, which included announcing the supposedly clear new five-stage national alert system, and then saying we were currently at level three-and-a-half.
It never got off the runway.
The new system is: watch what Scotland is doing; wait a week during which ministers can build the suspense by denying or trashing the Scottish approach; do the same.
The SNP would not be anywhere near as popular without the Tories as a foil. It has been the cover for a lot of other failures.
It is Johnson's malevolent incompetence, as outlined in the header, that will end the United Kingdom.
The end of Transition is set to be a trainwreck too. What else can we expect?
Traditionally the Tories love a winner. And that goes above anything else.
https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1299811051924578304?s=09
The Government won't want to go after income tax, NI and VAT - too controversial, too obvious - with the caveat that they might scrap the preferential NI rate currently enjoyed by the self-employed, which is something that Sunak has hinted at in the past. They daren't touch the stickbangers, of course, so we are stuck with the wretched triple lock for the foreseeable. Hiking corporation tax at the same time as trying to get us through Brexit might be considered brave, in the Sir Humphrey sense.
Thus, the most obvious targets are tax reliefs enjoyed by the working age population. The prime candidate is a big Brown-style raid on pensions, this time normalising reliefs at the basic rate for all contributions. The FT was suggesting earlier in the year that CGT might be rounded up to a flat rate of 28% for all assets, and my husband was also speculating just yesterday that the annual contribution limit for ISAs might be cut in half.
Of course, the most radical measure would be to go all out with a wealth tax and pocket a one-off levy on all assets - savings, pensions, shares, property, the lot - which could potentially recoup the cost of all the extra borrowing taken out during the Plague. But I think it really would take a Corbyn Government to dare to try something like that!
I think something like that is likely.
But they need to stop ignoring the elephant in the room, which is the £25bn+ spent on the main residence relief CGT loophole.
That is worth more than all the rest put together.
You are probably right.
Can anyone remember the impact of removing Mortgage Tax Relief which I would have thought even more dramatic.
There was tax relief on interest payments on £30k of mortgage for each individual or married couple, and unmarried couples got 2 allowances so £60k. Discrimination *against* married couples.
Nigel Lawson announced in his budget speech on March 15 1988 that:
"Under the present system an unmarried couple can get twice as much mortgage interest relief as a married couple. This has attracted increasing—and justified—criticism. I propose to put a stop to it as from August this year. Thereafter, the £30,000 limit on mortgage interest relief will be related to the house or flat, irrespective of the number of borrowers. "
Interest rates were nearly 10% so it made a hell of a difference.
So unmarried couples went bonkers buying houses for the next 4 months, knowing that they would get a benefit of about £700-800 per year at a time when average full time salary was about £12000.
They knew precisely that they would benefit when they completed by 31 July.
House prices went up by 20% between Q1 and Q3 1988, and 25% that year. That was about 4x faster than either 1987 or 1989. (Nationwide)0 -
Thanks. I like podcasts and that sounds interesting.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.0 -
Usually fat finger syndrome on PB, nothing more.RobD said:
Quite amazed that this post has been flagged as spam!Philip_Thompson said:
Absolutely.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?
If you don't want to be quarantined then don't travel overseas during a pandemic.-1 -
Some clear policies on the big issues of the day would be a start. They are in danger of believing that waiting for the Tories to implode is enough. People are wanting something solid to vote for. The fact that the Tories are still on 40% after all this debacle is a sign that something with political solidity and belief is required. The other necessity is proof of competence. Before Blair could win he had to have ideas, dynamism and a credible centrist party. Labour lost elections they could and should have won in 1992, 2010 and 2017. It can happen again.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
0 -
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.1 -
You are of course selectively quoting single day data. The figures are here https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/download-todays-data-geographic-distribution-covid-19-cases-worldwide. Austria's figures were 382 as recently as yesterday. It is admittedly fairly steady at just over 20 cases per 100,000 (the cutoff) and has been for over a week, preceded by a rapid rise from about 10 the week before that, which is probably what gave rise to most concern. France has rapidly risen to over 80/100,000 and Spain to over 200. Portugal in contrast has risen from about 14 to about 19 in a week and its quarantin lifting is starting to look a little premature. Using the ECDC's preferrd 14-day infection figures, Portugal is on 33 and Austria 42.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?0 -
At this point in the election cycle, Blair was still a year and a half away from becoming leader.algarkirk said:
Some clear policies on the big issues of the day would be a start. They are in danger of believing that waiting for the Tories to implode is enough. People are wanting something solid to vote for. The fact that the Tories are still on 40% after all this debacle is a sign that something with political solidity and belief is required. The other necessity is proof of competence. Before Blair could win he had to have ideas, dynamism and a credible centrist party. Labour lost elections they could and should have won in 1992, 2010 and 2017. It can happen again.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
With Covid, there won't even be local elections for another nine months. Given the current outstanding internal issues with Labour, and the fact that pretty much all governing apart from dealing with Covid has gone out of the window, he would be crazy to start trying to float ideas now.
1 -
The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.0 -
I think it’s probably best for Labour to stay a million miles away from (most of) the issues of the day until Brexit is done and dusted. Right now, the Conservative party (for good or ill) owns Brexit. Whatever the outcome, there’s no benefit to Labour that will accrue from sticking their oar in in any substantive fashion & the government is insisting on keeping everything secret to the point that it’s impossible to make any kind of constructive policy suggestions.algarkirk said:
Some clear policies on the big issues of the day would be a start. They are in danger of believing that waiting for the Tories to implode is enough. People are wanting something solid to vote for. The fact that the Tories are still on 40% after all this debacle is a sign that something with political solidity and belief is required. The other necessity is proof of competence. Before Blair could win he had to have ideas, dynamism and a credible centrist party. Labour lost elections they could and should have won in 1992, 2010 and 2017. It can happen again.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
After Brexit is done, however it turns out, the voters that lent their votes to the Cons to "get Brexit done" will be up for grabs again. That’s the time to start looking like a government in waiting.
Right now, anything Labour does will either make them look ineffectual (because they’re not in government) or make it easier to make them look anti-Brexit & therefore anti-the group of voters that they might well need in the next GE. Why take the risk?
Frankly, whether Brexit is intrinsically "good" or "bad", the qualities displayed by the current government suggest they’re going to make a hash of it regardless. Why get in the way of your opponent when they’re insisting on making mistakes that you can’t rectify or prevent, even if it was in the national interest to do so?1 -
I'll have a listen.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
I noticed today a Labour members twitter, someone with quite a lot of followers, and he mentioned solidarity with the miners in his profile. I don't even know how to process that one.0 -
The rest of the Shadow Cabinet seem very lightweight and largely invisible. That does not help Starmer. Something needs doing there. What are they all doing?algarkirk said:
Some clear policies on the big issues of the day would be a start. They are in danger of believing that waiting for the Tories to implode is enough. People are wanting something solid to vote for. The fact that the Tories are still on 40% after all this debacle is a sign that something with political solidity and belief is required. The other necessity is proof of competence. Before Blair could win he had to have ideas, dynamism and a credible centrist party. Labour lost elections they could and should have won in 1992, 2010 and 2017. It can happen again.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.0 -
What kinds of policies should Labour look to implement? Isn't the issue that right now the Tories are implementing them anyway?0
-
They didn't consult their time machine?IanB2 said:
The data subsequent to the decision suggests that they have messed up badly.RobD said:
Why are you so obsessed with whether or not Austria should have been quarantined or not. It obviously exceeded a threshold they used which caused it to be added to the list. No doubt there is a requirement of being x days below the threshold before it is removed. They haven't cocked up anything.IanB2 said:Today’s new case data: Portugal +320, Austria +181
How long before the government admits it has c**ked up quarantining Austria?-1 -
-
Can't see the TweetTheScreamingEagles said:1 -
0
-
“ The Johnson method of government: total power with absolutely no responsibility”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/30/the-johnson-method-of-government-total-power-with-absolutely-no-responsibility
Parliament returns this week with a growing number of Conservative MPs anxious that a summer strewn with screeching U-turns and howling errors is giving their government a reputation for blithering ineptitude that is draining away public support.
The shrewder people on the Conservative benches know that power without responsibility is a poisoned method of governing that will rebound on their party. A cabinet of blunderers is bad enough. A cabinet that refuses to take any responsibility for its mistakes invites an especially severe verdict from the public.0 -
You might be happier if you didn't spend so much of your time wishing misfortune on an individual or set of individuals.Scott_xP said:
I anticipate with relish the day BoZo reaps the consequences of "getting what he wanted"...Charles said:You are saying he should have got what he wanted with no consequences.
0 -
1
-
When someone tells you the world is going to shit, it's fun to ask them what year they would like to be transported back to. Maybe they would have been happier before the end of rationing, or the elimination of smallpox, or the discovery of penicillin. Or maybe they would have liked 1919, or 1649, or maybe the fun and laughter of 1347 ? Presumably longer life, modern medicine, travel and education mean little besides the warm comfort of 'the good old days'.Luckyguy1983 said:The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.
So come on folks, what year would you *really* like to be living in?1 -
I would be happier if that set of individuals weren't delivering misfortune on the whole country on a daily basis.Luckyguy1983 said:You might be happier if you didn't spend so much of your time wishing misfortune on an individual or set of individuals.
0 -
That would be tough for me to answer.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The things they produce which I like. Favourable. Those I don't not.
Which, I suspect would be true of most.
Except it seems to be another bloody "culture war" touchstone.0 -
Alleged Piers CorbynTheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Largely agree but:-Phil said:
I think it’s probably best for Labour to stay a million miles away from (most of) the issues of the day until Brexit is done and dusted. Right now, the Conservative party (for good or ill) owns Brexit. Whatever the outcome, there’s no benefit to Labour that will accrue from sticking their oar in in any substantive fashion & the government is insisting on keeping everything secret to the point that it’s impossible to make any kind of constructive policy suggestions.algarkirk said:
Some clear policies on the big issues of the day would be a start. They are in danger of believing that waiting for the Tories to implode is enough. People are wanting something solid to vote for. The fact that the Tories are still on 40% after all this debacle is a sign that something with political solidity and belief is required. The other necessity is proof of competence. Before Blair could win he had to have ideas, dynamism and a credible centrist party. Labour lost elections they could and should have won in 1992, 2010 and 2017. It can happen again.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
After Brexit is done, however it turns out, the voters that lent their votes to the Cons to "get Brexit done" will be up for grabs again. That’s the time to start looking like a government in waiting.
Right now, anything Labour does will either make them look ineffectual (because they’re not in government) or make it easier to make them look anti-Brexit & therefore anti-the group of voters that they might well need in the next GE. Why take the risk?
Frankly, whether Brexit is intrinsically "good" or "bad", the qualities displayed by the current government suggest they’re going to make a hash of it regardless. Why get in the way of your opponent when they’re insisting on making mistakes that you can’t rectify or prevent, even if it was in the national interest to do so?
1. They need to try and scrutinise. It may be hard but necessary especially with regard to all the changes the govt is making to the machinery of government. These may not be of interest to the public but they still matter and they must not go through by default and without scrutiny.
2. What they do say publicly must be very much as if they are speaking for the public, saying what the public is thinking and saying. There is already a smell of “one law for us, one for them” etc so this could be a useful meme to use. But Starmer needs to talk less like a lawyer in a courtroom - the public don’t care about forensic analyses of letters etc - and with more passion and well-controlled, well-directed common-sense-like fury at the government’s failings and the effect this is having on real people. He needs to drive a wedge between the Tories and their somewhat hubristic claim to represent the People.
And in the background he (Starmer) needs to do the hard work of working out what sort of party Labour is, who it is for, what its values are, what it wants to be in power for, what sort of country Britain should be in the 2020’s and beyond. And make damn sure that who are still inhaling and being intoxicated by the fumes of Corbyn’s dismal reign get out taking their toxicity with them or learn the new tunes.0 -
It’s the Left’s version of the nostalgia of some on the right for Empire.nova said:
I'll have a listen.Cyclefree said:On topic, if you have the time it is worth listening to the podcast Corbynism: The Post-Mortem. 11 episodes but you can pick the ones you’re most interested in. There are some really good interviewees and lots to learn - not just about Labour under Corbyn but politics in general.
The one with Sir John Curtice is very good and makes the point that, while Corbyn was a titanically unpopular leader, more than his departure is needed for Labour to recover. It needs to work out what sort of party it is given that it holds both middle class seats and seats which are poor. It cannot simply think that with a few tweaks and nice policies it can go back to being the party for the working-class, as it was for much of the 20th century. It needs to cast off the Durham Miners Gala-style sentimentality and take a cool hard look at where its support is and who its coming from.
I’d be interested in what Labour people think of it, if any have heard it.
The other two episodes I found fascinating were the ones on Scottish Labour and Defining Corbynism.
I noticed today a Labour members twitter, someone with quite a lot of followers, and he mentioned solidarity with the miners in his profile. I don't even know how to process that one.0 -
4
-
0
-
Matthew Goodwin must be gutted more people have a favourable view of the BBC than unfavourable1
-
One of these is entirely within your control, the other is not.Scott_xP said:
I would be happier if that set of individuals weren't delivering misfortune on the whole country on a daily basis.Luckyguy1983 said:You might be happier if you didn't spend so much of your time wishing misfortune on an individual or set of individuals.
0 -
The wider question is where is the 500 billion coming from due to WFHCorrectHorseBattery said:https://www.ft.com/content/ed16e625-0399-4da2-92f0-1c32dd56cb08
Where is the money coming from?0 -
When did the FT comments get so left wing, it's great0
-
Don’t be silly. Learning that your actions have consequences for you is essential to becoming a functioning adult.Luckyguy1983 said:
You might be happier if you didn't spend so much of your time wishing misfortune on an individual or set of individuals.Scott_xP said:
I anticipate with relish the day BoZo reaps the consequences of "getting what he wanted"...Charles said:You are saying he should have got what he wanted with no consequences.
Having a 55-year old man with the moral maturity of a 5-year old as our PM is our misfortune not his.
At this point I’d take 2015 and pray like mad that various actors here, in Europe and in the US took different decisions.....Peter_the_Punter said:
When someone tells you the world is going to shit, it's fun to ask them what year they would like to be transported back to. Maybe they would have been happier before the end of rationing, or the elimination of smallpox, or the discovery of penicillin. Or maybe they would have liked 1919, or 1649, or maybe the fun and laughter of 1347 ? Presumably longer life, modern medicine, travel and education mean little besides the warm comfort of 'the good old days'.Luckyguy1983 said:The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.
So come on folks, what year would you *really* like to be living in?1 -
Not much of an argument, though. For one thing, we've all had the misfortune to be born before the elimination of cancer, or for that matter covid-19. Neither fact keeps me awake at night. For another, "is going to shit" doesn't imply that we have got there yet. Since the second world war tens of millions of people at least have lived in conditions where, yes, flipping back to any of the dates you mention couldn't have made things worse. How do you know we aren't headed that way?Peter_the_Punter said:
When someone tells you the world is going to shit, it's fun to ask them what year they would like to be transported back to. Maybe they would have been happier before the end of rationing, or the elimination of smallpox, or the discovery of penicillin. Or maybe they would have liked 1919, or 1649, or maybe the fun and laughter of 1347 ? Presumably longer life, modern medicine, travel and education mean little besides the warm comfort of 'the good old days'.Luckyguy1983 said:The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.
So come on folks, what year would you *really* like to be living in?0 -
Labour should ask for all the railways to now be taken back into public hands and for the UK to run them rather than foreign Governments, easy patriotic, pro-Britain sell0
-
Dems starting to panic about complacency factor.
https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1300101114918961152
0 -
0
-
No media organisation did a better job at legitimising and promoting Leave as the BBC did.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1299836495092527105?s=21rottenborough said:Dems starting to panic about complacency factor.
0 -
-
https://twitter.com/montie/status/1300164854842626049
Farage is on the news all the bloody time, on every single issue he gets a comment.
For goodness sake you got the Government you wanted, yet the problem is still somewhere else1 -
Any govt that tries something that stupid is voluntarily sitting on a time bomb.CorrectHorseBattery said:Labour should ask for all the railways to now be taken back into public hands and for the UK to run them rather than foreign Governments, easy patriotic, pro-Britain sell
Approval will last precisely as long as it takes politically driven management and politically driven Unions to f*ck it all up again BR-style.1 -
Is this one of those that doubles in 28 days if not paid?Scott_xP said:0 -
Except, I *think*, that Putin is a traditional Russian Nationalist. They fundamentally don't believe in the win-win.rcs1000 said:
In which case, he should want a really prosperous Europe (and everywhere else in the world) sucking in oil and gas exports.Malmesbury said:
But oil price = power for Putin. It's his number 1 thing. I can't see any way that he could let that slide.IanB2 said:
Putin’s agenda is sowing discord within the US and mistrust between the US and its european allies. So far his backing Trump is paying off handsomely.Malmesbury said:
If Trump was controlled by Putin - why didn't he ban fracking? That would have prevented (or at least massively reduced) the fall in the oil prices which has crippled Russia.noneoftheabove said:
You might be right, you might be wrong, but Im pretty sure no investigation would lead to a shared consensus in the US.kinabalu said:
I don't think Putin has kompromat on Trump. I think Trump's servility to him stems from awe at being in the presence of a man who is everything that he wants to be.noneoftheabove said:
Realistically its too late for an investigation to make much difference. Neither side will accept its findings if it goes against them. If he is compromised by the Russians, the Russians have what they want already. If he isnt compromised by them, they still benefit massively from the loss of confidence and division in the West. None of this can get fixed by an investigation, it can only be fixed by the voters.Alistair said:
He thinks in terms of Russia being either the victor or the victim. The good version, for him, is a European beholden to the Mighty Russian Empire.
2 -
The Government is doing precisely that thoughMattW said:
Any govt that tries something that stupid is voluntarily sitting on a time bomb.CorrectHorseBattery said:Labour should ask for all the railways to now be taken back into public hands and for the UK to run them rather than foreign Governments, easy patriotic, pro-Britain sell
Approval will last precisely as long as it takes politically driven management and politically driven Unions to f*ck it all up again BR-style.0 -
Andrew Adonis seems to think Blair was leader of the “Labour and the Lib Dems” party.
https://twitter.com/andrew_adonis/status/1299953216277315585?s=210 -
The problem I have with this narrative - and I am no fan of the Lib Dems in coalition nor their performance since - is what else he expected the LDs to do in 2010.williamglenn said:Andrew Adonis seems to think Blair was leader of the “Labour and the Lib Dems” party.
https://twitter.com/andrew_adonis/status/1299953216277315585?s=21
The numbers for a coalition with Labour weren't there, is he suggesting a C&S with the Tories in which case I suppose that makes a bit more sense, not clear though0 -
1999, that's a pretty easy one. Scotland have just won the rugby, the economy is booming, the middle east hasn't been disasterously destabalised with the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.Peter_the_Punter said:
When someone tells you the world is going to shit, it's fun to ask them what year they would like to be transported back to. Maybe they would have been happier before the end of rationing, or the elimination of smallpox, or the discovery of penicillin. Or maybe they would have liked 1919, or 1649, or maybe the fun and laughter of 1347 ? Presumably longer life, modern medicine, travel and education mean little besides the warm comfort of 'the good old days'.Luckyguy1983 said:The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.
So come on folks, what year would you *really* like to be living in?
The Matrix got it right, it really was the peak of human civilisation.1 -
He almost was, since the LDs were secretly planning to go into coalition with Labour in 1997 (as long as Blair didn't win a huge landslide).williamglenn said:Andrew Adonis seems to think Blair was leader of the “Labour and the Lib Dems” party.
https://twitter.com/andrew_adonis/status/1299953216277315585?s=211 -
I'm not sure that you comprehend the levels of progress that human society have made. The homeless on the street have better medical care and life expectancy than Kings of England in the range of dates above.IshmaelZ said:
Not much of an argument, though. For one thing, we've all had the misfortune to be born before the elimination of cancer, or for that matter covid-19. Neither fact keeps me awake at night. For another, "is going to shit" doesn't imply that we have got there yet. Since the second world war tens of millions of people at least have lived in conditions where, yes, flipping back to any of the dates you mention couldn't have made things worse. How do you know we aren't headed that way?Peter_the_Punter said:
When someone tells you the world is going to shit, it's fun to ask them what year they would like to be transported back to. Maybe they would have been happier before the end of rationing, or the elimination of smallpox, or the discovery of penicillin. Or maybe they would have liked 1919, or 1649, or maybe the fun and laughter of 1347 ? Presumably longer life, modern medicine, travel and education mean little besides the warm comfort of 'the good old days'.Luckyguy1983 said:The
I don't agree that it's going to shit at all - it's moving forward as it always has done.Black_Rook said:
I was doing my usual browse through the latest reports of doom and disaster in the newspapers earlier this week, and chanced upon an article about Stoicism and the writings of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. I've now ordered a copy of the Meditations and an accompanying analysis.kle4 said:I must say that the imminent american election, with all the bitterness and dodgy dealing, suddenly felt like the wrong time for me to have read a trilogy set during the fall of the Roman Republic. Far too tempting to see signs of terminal decline in institutions as a result.
If the world is going to shit (well, we know it's going to shit, it's merely a question of how badly) then thinking about how to endure disasters that are almost entirely out of one's own control would seem wise.
So come on folks, what year would you *really* like to be living in?
Have you ever seen the following?
https://ourworldindata.org/exports/GDP-per-capita-in-the-uk-since-1270_v6_850x600.svg0 -
It's obvious what he thinks they should have done: backed the return of Tony Blair as PM from the Lords.CorrectHorseBattery said:
The problem I have with this narrative - and I am no fan of the Lib Dems in coalition nor their performance since - is what else he expected the LDs to do in 2010.williamglenn said:Andrew Adonis seems to think Blair was leader of the “Labour and the Lib Dems” party.
https://twitter.com/andrew_adonis/status/1299953216277315585?s=21
The numbers for a coalition with Labour weren't there, is he suggesting a C&S with the Tories in which case I suppose that makes a bit more sense, not clear though1 -
The FT has been left-wing since 1992 when they recommended that people vote Labour. (That was down to Ed Balls I think).CorrectHorseBattery said:When did the FT comments get so left wing, it's great
0
This discussion has been closed.