politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sunak continues to defy gravity in YouGov’s favourability rati
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sunak continues to defy gravity in YouGov’s favourability ratings
YouGov have just updated their favourability trackers and as can be seen the Chancellor continues to ride supreme although still a long way down from his net plus 49% just at the start of lockdown. He, of course, has been making many of the key lockdown announcements on things like the hugely expensive furlough scheme and, of course, the changes on VAT and last month the cheap meals offer.
0
Comments
-
!!0
-
Second! Like Trump!0
-
Mr Gravity will come for Sunak sooner or later.....especially when the bill for his our largesse comes due.0
-
I thought he was supposed to be a yes-man, a patsy?
0 -
Have the SNP said they would veto English membership of the EU or SM/CU?CarlottaVance said:
Not with the SNP's declared policies....williamglenn said:
We can make the border between England and Scotland as seamless as the border between Belgium and the Netherlands.LostPassword said:
Sure, but one of the things that Brexit has driven home to me is how much I dislike borders. So I'm prepared to put up with a lot to do without them. Including being joined in a Union with a country that voted for Johnson as Prime Minister.Pagan2 said:
Good fences make good neighbours....its an aphorism with a lot of truth. By all means advocate no fences but dont be surprised when your neighbours do things you find offensiveLostPassword said:
As a general principle I'm opposed to creating borders between people. So I voted to Remain in the EU and would vote to Remain in the UK.Pagan2 said:
Genuine question. Why do you want scotland to stay. I don't mind if they stay or go personally. However I am curious why you want them to stay or anyone else for that matter. It largely seems to consist of "well we have been together 300 years"CorrectHorseBattery said:
I support Scotland staying in the UK, I just don't see how Indy Ref 2 can be turned down if the SNP win againBig_G_NorthWales said:
Do you really want a labour government or even coalition and at the same time want Scotland's independenceCorrectHorseBattery said:
Why do you hate democracy?CarlottaVance said:Asked and answered.
https://twitter.com/macnahgalla/status/1300812997737275392?s=20
I accept the rough with the smooth.
I can see the appeal of the alternative. I expect that if I was still in Scotland at the time of the vote that it would be the first time my wife and I would [knowingly] vote on opposite sides.
But, well, I was at an impressionable age when the Berlin Wall came down. My grandmother was reliant on the kindness of strangers to see her safely across borders as a refugee before the war. "Workers of the World Unite" not "Workers divide yourselves and compete against each other".
I'll vote against a border.
and NEW THREAD0 -
As someone likes to remind me that Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor since records began and then he became PM and his chickens came home to roost, and thus became the most unpopular PM since records began.
Is Sunak the heir to Brown?0 -
0
-
The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.0
-
"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-120610870 -
Identity.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.0 -
Nothing as dodgy and self serving as the Granita pact in the mix, that we know of.TheScreamingEagles said:As someone likes to remind me that Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor since records began and then he became PM and his chickens came home to roost, and thus became the most unpopular PM since records began.
Is Sunak the heir to Brown?0 -
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-120610871 -
I continue to hold my lay of Sunak0
-
They don't appear to be up here, only in England where shall we say the truth is a stranger as far as Scotland is concerned.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
Could well be.TheScreamingEagles said:As someone likes to remind me that Gordon Brown was the most popular Chancellor since records began and then he became PM and his chickens came home to roost, and thus became the most unpopular PM since records began.
Is Sunak the heir to Brown?
To add to your point, Brown's popularity as Chancellor was well established after presiding over a decade of steady economic expansion combined with public service growth, yet it had little resilience in the face of an economic meltdown from 2008.
As the table shows, Sunak's popularity derives solely from a favourable reaction to the measures he took in March. Unlike Brown, he doesn't have a well established track record. So there's potentially little substance underpinning those ratings, suggesting that those ratings will collapse once he has to announce unpopular measures to replace those popular ones coming to an end. In addition, if Britain's recession continues to be deeper than those of other countries, it'll be harder for our current Chancellor to deflect blame for that off the government.0 -
It says that they have succeeded in making themselves interchangeable with 'Scotland'. So any attack on how horrible, pervy, bullying, incompetent, venal or anything else they are, has become an attack on Scotland and Scots. That's why, whilst well intentioned, Douglas Ross's idea of a 'relentless war on the SNP' won't work, for the time being, in my opinion. Instead, opponents of the SNP need to try, however away with the fairies it seems, to envisage a Scotland after the SNP, and be relentless in their attempts to inspire people about that vision.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-120610870 -
Just a load of bollox apart from the Salmond stitch up attempt. Bet he cannot name anyone found guilty of anything. Usual unionist propaganda, it gets more fantastic by the day, lots of pans wetting going on.TheScreamingEagles said:Absolutely shocking.
https://twitter.com/GdnScotland/status/13008328804913643540 -
When the time comes for the chickens to be encouraged back to their roosts, Sunak is going to have a very difficult problem, both macro-economic and political. The accumulated debt can be left festering for a long period, as long as it can be financed and refinanced at ultra-low interest rates, but the deficit can't be - it's the financial equivalent of the epidemiological R number, and has to be brought back under control to prevent a destabilising persistent rise in debt.. So there will have to be tax rises, and substantial ones, to get the deficit under control.
The political problem is obvious - no-one likes tax rises if they fall on them, or in many cases even if they don't. However, the macro-economic conundrum is even harder to crack. This is because tax rises don't just raise money for the Treasury, they also clobber demand, which is the opposite of what is required if the economy is to recover. There is no pot of gold sitting there to be raided without any downside - if you tax the better-off a lot more, they will spend less, affecting the whole economy and thus the less well-off.
George Osborne faced a somewhat similar dilemma in 2010, when he inherited a clearly unsustainable fiscal position whereby Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown were spending four pounds for every three raised in revenue. Luckily for us all, he judged it extremely well, managing to get the deficit down to reasonable levels within a few budget cycles and without provoking mass unemployment.
Will Sunak be able to repeat the trick? There are big headwinds - not only the self-imposed looming disaster of a chaotic Brexit, but also disruption to the world economy which looks deeper and more widespread even than the global financial crisis of 2008/9. It's a bit early to be sure, but my hunch is that the economic hit of Covid-19 is going to take a long time to recover from.
Overall, I'm not optimistic that Sunak will be able to emulate Osborne, talented though he is.1 -
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.
0 -
Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.1
-
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.0 -
FPT
Either the Scottish Central Bank and Scottish Pound, or the European Central Bank and Euro would be the only logical options in my opinion.CarlottaVance said:
With which Central Bank and Currency?Philip_Thompson said:
I expect EU entry to take less time to negotiate than the exit itself.Pagan2 said:
You do realise most of your pluses involve the eu giving scotland immediate entry and even as someone that supports scottish independence I dont expect eu entry to take less that 10 to 15 yearsFF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent set of rules applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of the Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of being an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
I expect the Scottish Government would start simultaneous negotiations for independence from the UK and membership of the EU and they would transition seemlessly from one to the other.
Technically the latter isn't an option without years of the former - but it would take a unanimous treaty to let Scotland into the EU anyway and with a unanimous treaty the Europeans could change the rules for the Euro to let Scotland in, creating bespoke rules for Scotland as its a previously unheard of example of a country without a currency of its own.0 -
Maybe the government might consider repealing the law that made spending cuts illegal?Richard_Nabavi said:When the time comes for the chickens to be encouraged back to their roosts, Sunak is going to have a very difficult problem, both macro-economic and political. The accumulated debt can be left festering for a long period, as long as it can be financed and refinanced at ultra-low interest rates, but the deficit can't be - it's the financial equivalent of the epidemiological R number, and has to be brought back under control to prevent a destabilising persistent rise in debt.. So there will have to be tax rises, and substantial ones, to get the deficit under control.
The political problem is obvious - no-one likes tax rises if they fall on them, or in many cases even if they don't. However, the macro-economic conundrum is even harder to crack. This is because tax rises don't just raise money for the Treasury, they also clobber demand, which is the opposite of what is required if the economy is to recover. There is no pot of gold sitting there to be raided without any downside - if you tax the better-off a lot more, they will spend less, affecting the whole economy and thus the less well-off.
George Osborne faced a somewhat similar dilemma in 2010, when he inherited a clearly unsustainable fiscal position whereby Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown were spending four pounds for every three raised in revenue. Luckily for us all, he judged it extremely well, managing to get the deficit down to reasonable levels within a few budget cycles and without provoking mass unemployment.
Will Sunak be able to repeat the trick? There are big headwinds - not only the self-imposed looming disaster of a chaotic Brexit, but also disruption to the world economy which looks deeper and more widespread even than the global financial crisis of 2008/9. It's a bit early to be sure, but my hunch is that the economic hit of Covid-19 is going to take a long time to recover from.
Overall, I'm not optimistic that Sunak will be able to emulate Osborne, talented though he is.0 -
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour. So far Sunak has at least managed to resist the siren voices of the austerity hawks. As you say, recovering from the pandemic will be hard enough, and Brexit is unlikely to help (subject to whatever deals might be achieved in the next few months). The last thing we need is an ill-judged bout of austerity.Richard_Nabavi said:When the time comes for the chickens to be encouraged back to their roosts, Sunak is going to have a very difficult problem, both macro-economic and political. The accumulated debt can be left festering for a long period, as long as it can be financed and refinanced at ultra-low interest rates, but the deficit can't be - it's the financial equivalent of the epidemiological R number, and has to be brought back under control to prevent a destabilising persistent rise in debt.. So there will have to be tax rises, and substantial ones, to get the deficit under control.
The political problem is obvious - no-one likes tax rises if they fall on them, or in many cases even if they don't. However, the macro-economic conundrum is even harder to crack. This is because tax rises don't just raise money for the Treasury, they also clobber demand, which is the opposite of what is required if the economy is to recover. There is no pot of gold sitting there to be raided without any downside - if you tax the better-off a lot more, they will spend less, affecting the whole economy and thus the less well-off.
George Osborne faced a somewhat similar dilemma in 2010, when he inherited a clearly unsustainable fiscal position whereby Alastair Darling and Gordon Brown were spending four pounds for every three raised in revenue. Luckily for us all, he judged it extremely well, managing to get the deficit down to reasonable levels within a few budget cycles and without provoking mass unemployment.
Will Sunak be able to repeat the trick? There are big headwinds - not only the self-imposed looming disaster of a chaotic Brexit, but also disruption to the world economy which looks deeper and more widespread even than the global financial crisis of 2008/9. It's a bit early to be sure, but my hunch is that the economic hit of Covid-19 is going to take a long time to recover from.
Overall, I'm not optimistic that Sunak will be able to emulate Osborne, talented though he is.3 -
Got to get your snide mask comment in don’t you?contrarian said:
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.
0 -
-
Don't waste your time, Contrarian defends the indefensible, like coked up racists using the words like 'Paki'.nichomar said:
Got to get your snide mask comment in don’t you?contrarian said:
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.1 -
-
Roglic looks like a good bet to win Le Tour. But still a long way to go.0
-
Ross is another dumpling, so far everything he has promoted for Scotland he has already voted to have banned from Westminster. He is a clown.Luckyguy1983 said:
It says that they have succeeded in making themselves interchangeable with 'Scotland'. So any attack on how horrible, pervy, bullying, incompetent, venal or anything else they are, has become an attack on Scotland and Scots. That's why, whilst well intentioned, Douglas Ross's idea of a 'relentless war on the SNP' won't work, for the time being, in my opinion. Instead, opponents of the SNP need to try, however away with the fairies it seems, to envisage a Scotland after the SNP, and be relentless in their attempts to inspire people about that vision.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..2 -
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..0 -
Weren't Labour planning to cut even more relative to what Osborne actually did?Richard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..3 -
I get it.nichomar said:
Got to get your snide mask comment in don’t you?contrarian said:
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.
Authoritarians in favour of compulsory masking cannot stand it when the obvious downsides are pointed out. It does not compute.
There isn;t strong evidence either way. Said the deputy chief medical officer only the other day.
1 -
Tesla being worth more than pretty much the rest of the car industry combined is a hell of a reach too. Assumes we'll all be getting Teslas when the industry goes electric - currently the french (Renault (Owned by Nissan I think ?)/Peugeot) look to be offering models below any of Tesla's price points.TheScreamingEagles said:
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.
Nissan's market cap is 15.8 billion compared to Tesla 446 billion !0 -
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..5 -
Tesla might have this market valuation but the latest issue of Which reckons their cars are very unreliable and develop a lot of faults.Pulpstar said:
Tesla being worth more than pretty much the rest of the car industry combined is a hell of a reach too. Assumes we'll all be getting Teslas when the industry goes electric - currently the french (Renault (Owned by Nissan I think ?)/Peugeot) look to be offering models below any of Tesla's price points.TheScreamingEagles said:
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.
Nissan's market cap is 15.8 billion compared to Tesla 446 billion !0 -
TheScreamingEagles said:
Don't waste your time, Contrarian defends the indefensible, like coked up racists using the words like 'Paki'.nichomar said:
Got to get your snide mask comment in don’t you?contrarian said:
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.
I did not defend that word and would never use it.
Look, Why don't you just ban me mate, you've been dying to for ages. In some ways it would be a release. It would stop me wasting a bucket of my time as well. I could watch some paint dry.0 -
Nah, PB needs its court jesters.contrarian said:TheScreamingEagles said:
Don't waste your time, Contrarian defends the indefensible, like coked up racists using the words like 'Paki'.nichomar said:
Got to get your snide mask comment in don’t you?contrarian said:
Apple yes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Apple has always been a success this century, they didn't need a pandemic to become so huge.contrarian said:
Its almost as if lockdown was incredibly good for the technology sector. Retail? its almost like Bezos designed the current arrangements himself.Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-12061087
But compulsory masking, social distancing, soaring parking charges and sky high business rates haven;t exactly helped your high street shop fight back against the online retailers.
I did not defend that word and would never use it.
Look, Why don't you just ban me mate, you've been dying to for ages. In some ways it would be a release. It would stop me wasting a bucket of my time as well. I could watch some paint dry.0 -
They weren't planning anything. Brown, in a most irresponsible piece of politicking, wouldn't let Darling carry out a comprehensive spending review. There was no plan at all.RobD said:
Weren't Labour planning to cut even more relative to what Osborne actually did?Richard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..3 -
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/25/alistair-darling-cut-deeper-margaret-thatcherRobD said:
Weren't Labour planning to cut even more relative to what Osborne actually did?Richard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..0 -
I'm a fan of the company but the valuation looks completely bonkers.MikeSmithson said:
Tesla might have this market valuation but the latest issue of Which reckons their cars are very unreliable and develop a lot of faults.Pulpstar said:
Tesla being worth more than pretty much the rest of the car industry combined is a hell of a reach too. Assumes we'll all be getting Teslas when the industry goes electric - currently the french (Renault (Owned by Nissan I think ?)/Peugeot) look to be offering models below any of Tesla's price points.TheScreamingEagles said:
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.
Nissan's market cap is 15.8 billion compared to Tesla 446 billion !0 -
Centrists such as Osborne, Mandelson, Hammond and Clegg would sell their granny to the Saudis or Russians for appropriate compensation but they're fundamentally competent when it comes to running a country's finances.Richard_Nabavi said:
They weren't planning anything. Brown, in a most irresponsible piece of politicking, wouldn't let Darling carry out a comprehensive spending review. There was no plan at all.RobD said:
Weren't Labour planning to cut even more relative to what Osborne actually did?Richard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..3 -
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..4 -
Mr Johnson's majority is so great that Mr Ross could claim to oppose Mr Johnson on everything from Brexit to letting the Americans use the words "Scotch whisky" for their own home made brews, and have all his Scottish MPs vote against - and it would be a sham exercise in fact and, possibly, in intent.malcolmg said:
Ross is another dumpling, so far everything he has promoted for Scotland he has already voted to have banned from Westminster. He is a clown.Luckyguy1983 said:
It says that they have succeeded in making themselves interchangeable with 'Scotland'. So any attack on how horrible, pervy, bullying, incompetent, venal or anything else they are, has become an attack on Scotland and Scots. That's why, whilst well intentioned, Douglas Ross's idea of a 'relentless war on the SNP' won't work, for the time being, in my opinion. Instead, opponents of the SNP need to try, however away with the fairies it seems, to envisage a Scotland after the SNP, and be relentless in their attempts to inspire people about that vision.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
It would be so uncharacteristic anyway I'm not sure how credible it would be with many voters. It also risks falling into the converse of Labour's trap. Labour basically tried to be Unionist when there was a full fat Unionist party available to vote for. Mr Ross risks trying to be pro-Scotland when there is a far more credibly pro-Scotland party to vote for, and wehn the question of actual independence would (probably) be settled quite separately by a referendum (ie not by voting for any one party).
Edit: Mr Ross would be more believable if his party had done a Murdo Fraser and gone independent from the London-based Tories. But would that still be credible enough now after their u-turn on Brexit?
0 -
-
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.1 -
Whether the SNP are a bunch of twats or not, as you imply the SNPbad Angry Brigade now look ridiculous. Just imagine if the SNP were as good as...well not any other UK parties...as good as imaginary good party X, indy would be on 75% and SNP the same.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-09-01/next-years-a-level-and-gcse-exams-could-be-delayed-schools-minister-says
Errhhhh, it was Labour's plan first0 -
Many a successful party have been run and led by twats.Gallowgate said:The fact that the SNP appear to be a bunch of tw*ts and yet are still miles ahead in the polls just says it all.
0 -
The United Kingdom Parliament.Carnyx said:
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.0 -
I would love for one of the Corbynite intake to say:CorrectHorseBattery said:
Why is it a contrast, Sir Keir? Weren't you a part of what you would say was a great opposition last year?
I certainly don't think his history in the Corbynite shadow cabinet is a disqualifier, and he needed to do it to win the leadership too, but I imagine that crowd must really dislike the increasingly unsubtle digs at the Jezziah.0 -
In which it is numerically swamped, and has no distinct representation as a whole, as another has mentioned already today.Casino_Royale said:
The United Kingdom Parliament.Carnyx said:
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.0 -
Ed Miliband was ok, but his position in the run up to the 2015 GE was incoherent, in that it was both that the Coalition cut too much, and that it had failed to cut as much as it said it would. It'd be possible to make that argument, but it was a poor line to attempt with the public, particular when enough people accepted that spending had been too high at the time.RobD said:
Weren't Labour planning to cut even more relative to what Osborne actually did?Richard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..0 -
Just as Scotland would be in the European Parliament and Brussels. Only more so.Carnyx said:
In which it is numerically swamped, and has no distinct representation as a whole, as another has mentioned already today.Casino_Royale said:
The United Kingdom Parliament.Carnyx said:
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.2 -
Tesla has big problems in Europe but that isn't obvious to people riding the Tesla stock chart and Tesla is rather sensible going to sell $5bn of shares to raise some capital at minimal cost to itself.MikeSmithson said:
Tesla might have this market valuation but the latest issue of Which reckons their cars are very unreliable and develop a lot of faults.Pulpstar said:
Tesla being worth more than pretty much the rest of the car industry combined is a hell of a reach too. Assumes we'll all be getting Teslas when the industry goes electric - currently the french (Renault (Owned by Nissan I think ?)/Peugeot) look to be offering models below any of Tesla's price points.TheScreamingEagles said:
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.
Nissan's market cap is 15.8 billion compared to Tesla 446 billion !
Personally I suspect the VW's I3 and other cars will rather damage Tesla's european market share - I know which car I would rather own and it's not a Tesla 3.0 -
When the options are all difficult, assume the path of least resistance will be taken, that is, kicking the can.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.0 -
I'm optimistic that when all is said and done actually Sunak won't have anywhere near as difficult to deal with compared to Osborne.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.
The reason being that Brown bequeathed a humongous structural deficit so growing out of it was never viable, even at full employment there was still a deficit. In contrast going into COVID19 there was no structural deficit. There has been a major systemic shock and it will lead to a lot of reforms but there seems to be little reason for a structural deficit.0 -
Is there some unwritten rule that celebrities must give their children stupid names?1
-
Pensions (both private relief and the triple lock) seem the obvious place to target if big savings are needed.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm optimistic that when all is said and done actually Sunak won't have anywhere near as difficult to deal with compared to Osborne.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.
The reason being that Brown bequeathed a humongous structural deficit so growing out of it was never viable, even at full employment there was still a deficit. In contrast going into COVID19 there was no structural deficit. There has been a major systemic shock and it will lead to a lot of reforms but there seems to be little reason for a structural deficit.0 -
Impressive - but how would it cope with a wet Wednesday night in Stoke?Andy_JS said:"Apple overtakes value of entire FTSE 100
Shares in the California-based iPhone maker enjoyed a boost after a stock split to make it more accessible to retail investors."
https://news.sky.com/story/apple-overtakes-value-of-entire-ftse-100-120610870 -
0
-
2
-
So is Hampshire, or London, or Wales, or Northern Ireland. Scotland is distinctly represented by its 59 MPs representing Scottish interests and through having the SoS for Scotland in the cabinet too.Carnyx said:
In which it is numerically swamped, and has no distinct representation as a whole, as another has mentioned already today.Casino_Royale said:
The United Kingdom Parliament.Carnyx said:
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.
Of course, if you don't feel "British" at all - I do - then we have a different problem. Which is what this all hinges on really, isn't it?0 -
-
Trump won Montana by over 20% last time.HYUFD said:0 -
Haha. I see the Osborne zombies are out in force again. Don't give it up guys.0
-
The coalition did a good job. We could use it as a government right now.FrankBooth said:Haha. I see the Osborne zombies are out in force again. Don't give it up guys.
1 -
0
-
Stunning revelation.CarlottaVance said:Mr Herdson nails it:
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1300854039068901377?s=20
Quite why they couldn't just leave it at socialism without the Soviet symbol I dont know.0 -
Don't succumb to Brownaphobic abuse again. It clouds and distorts.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm optimistic that when all is said and done actually Sunak won't have anywhere near as difficult to deal with compared to Osborne.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.
The reason being that Brown bequeathed a humongous structural deficit so growing out of it was never viable, even at full employment there was still a deficit. In contrast going into COVID19 there was no structural deficit. There has been a major systemic shock and it will lead to a lot of reforms but there seems to be little reason for a structural deficit.0 -
Not all XR supporters are going to take this view though. It's a pretty diverse set of sub-groups and people.kle4 said:
Stunning revelation.CarlottaVance said:Mr Herdson nails it:
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1300854039068901377?s=20
Quite why they couldn't just leave it at socialism without the Soviet symbol I dont know.0 -
Scotland would have distinct representation as a whole in the European Council. There's no equivalent UK body.CarlottaVance said:
Just as Scotland would be in the European Parliament and Brussels. Only more so.Carnyx said:
In which it is numerically swamped, and has no distinct representation as a whole, as another has mentioned already today.Casino_Royale said:
The United Kingdom Parliament.Carnyx said:
Formal representation? At what level, please?Casino_Royale said:
Scotland does have formal representation in the UK, and it does have votes. Just as England does too.FF43 said:
Scotland doesn't have formal representation in the UK. It doesn't have a vote. Any decision that isn't devolved to Holyrood is taken by the UK government alone in its interest. This is different from EU member states who have a formal vote and in practice a near veto on decisions made. If Scotland leaves the UK then obviously its informal influence on the affairs of what remains of the old United Kingdom also goes. However that influence isn't massive right now because of the difference in size of Scotland compared with England.Casino_Royale said:
This is poppycock, sorry.FF43 said:
Speaking as one of the more unionists of Scots, I have to accept that independence has real upsides to offset the downsides, while Brexit is entirely downside.Mexicanpete said:
I say this with a heavy heart. It is over BigG. Gordon Brown saved the day in 2014 and Labour have subsequently been punished for it. Labour no longer have the support in Scotland or motivation to do that again.
It should have been OK for thirty years, but Cameron's vanity EU referendum changed that.
Like Brexit, Scottish Independence is no longer about economic benefit. The heart will rule the head.
First on economics. Scotland would gain access to the European Single Market, set against the bigger loss of the UK market. Brexit is all loss.
Scotland would gain formal influence in Europe through having a vote and other representation. We can see how valuable that has been to Ireland in achieving its desired outcomes. Scotland has no formal influence in the UK (it doesn't have representation as a country) and limited actual influence due to the relative dominance of England. Brexit means a loss of influence internationally for the UK as whole.
Scotland would gain protection by being a member of the European Union thanks to independent rules being applied objectively by the ECJ. Governance in the UK is at the whim of a Downing Street government that doesn't protect Scotland's interest.
The sovereignty win of becoming an independent state is transformationally greater than leaving a multinational body, even an important one like the European Union
Scotland has *more* influence in the UK than it would have in the EU (where it'd be an even smaller fish and overruled by QMV on most issues). In the UK it has almost 10% of all UK MPs, each of which have the exact same rights and privileges as any other MP - including all the English ones. Barely 10 years ago Scots were both the PM and the Chancellor, and during the coalition Chief Secretary of the Treasury, with direct representation on the security council of the UN, the G7/8 and the G20. None of which Scotland could ever do again post-independence.
It's true at the moment as Scotland has chosen to elect largely separatist MPs. It thus has very limited representation in the UK Government as a whole. It's in this sense a feedback loop as the very election of the nationalist MPs helps create the grievances they rail against and rely upon to advance their agenda.
All this pre-dated Brexit and goes back to the 2015GE and (crucially) the politics of the preceding 18 months when independence garnered a huge head of steam.
Brexit was (and is) a convenient stick to beat the Union with but the roots run deeper. Far deeper.
BTW I am a supporters of unions (plural), which can be bigger than the sum of their parts. I do accept however there a real wins for Scotland if it becomes independent (against bigger losses IMO). Unlike Brexit, which has no real upsides at all and is a big mistake, albeit one we are committed to.
You repeating this (along with most of the rest of your previous post, without addressing the points in my response) doesn't make it true.
The recent history of Scottish (and Welsh and sometimes NIrish) governments' treatment by the current and previous Conservative governments is not a happy one.
And the Sec of State for Scotland is no longer Scotland's voice within the cabinet - but the Whitehall government's voice within Scotland.1 -
What's he trying to say? If Starmer some how wins its because the times are not normal?CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1300857843826950149
How would Aaron know?
0 -
The test will be who bears the pain not whether there will be pain. My assumption is that it will again not be the people who it never is.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I know, it's one of my favourite pieces of bonkersness.TheScreamingEagles said:
Richard, you're dealing with people who simultaneously criticise George Osborne for cutting the deficit too quickly and increasing the national debt.Richard_Nabavi said:
It's utter nonsense, complete garbage. There was no 'nice growth', there was an artificial and unsustainable slight boost from the ludicrously high and unsustainable overspend - after all, any fool, even Gordon Brown, can get a bit of temporary economic activity going by throwing zillions around. What Brown 'gifted' Osborne was the worst fiscal position in the whole of Europe other than Greece; what Osborne achieved was correcting that whilst keeping unemployment extremely low and growth reasonable - it really was a spectacular success.CorrectHorseBattery said:
But he's right, he killed off the nice growth Brown gifted him and almost put us into another recessionRichard_Nabavi said:
I do love this utterly bonkers mantra.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Osborne did not understand economics and flatlined the recovery inherited from Labour.. ..
Still, the question is what Sunak can do from the position he now faces. It looks more difficult even than what Osborne had to deal with. I expect he'll tread carefully for the next year or so, if only because no-one yet knows how big the Covid-19 hit will eventually be, nor what the resulting structural changes to the economy are going to be.0 -
Ironically, it's potentially good news for Trump in a sense if his leads in states that aren't going to be pivotal are fairly small as it suggests his vote nationally is efficiently distributed. Unless it's a blow-out election, Trump will win Montana anyway and it makes no difference if that's by a single or double figure margin. Equally, it's potentially bad news for Biden - there's no benefit in losing Montana marginally rather than massively and he'd rather have those votes in Michigan.DAlexander said:
Trump won Montana by over 20% last time.HYUFD said:
Biden could do with some closer polling margins in California and New York whilst retaining a national lead. There does look to be some risk he's distributing his vote inefficiently.
I mean, I get that a close poll in Montana could mean Biden is getting an 8% swing across the country, but the national polls don't support that (although they show him in a decent position).1 -
I reminded of a debate I had with a communist* a while back who said the Soviet Union really wasn't socialist because, drum roll, Stalin was in favour of war against Hitler, that a proper socialist would have sued for peace.kle4 said:
Stunning revelation.CarlottaVance said:Mr Herdson nails it:
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1300854039068901377?s=20
Quite why they couldn't just leave it at socialism without the Soviet symbol I dont know.
That like the Nazis, Stalin misused the description socialist.
*I'm not sure a true communist would wear Ralph Lauren articles of clothing.0 -
Yes. I have Montana as safe for Trump.DAlexander said:
Trump won Montana by over 20% last time.HYUFD said:0 -
I'm sure it is diverse, yet small groups and factions can exert disproportionate influence, particularly when they can align with more mainstream goals. Thats why we guard against extremist voices, even small ones.rottenborough said:
Not all XR supporters are going to take this view though. It's a pretty diverse set of sub-groups and people.kle4 said:
Stunning revelation.CarlottaVance said:Mr Herdson nails it:
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1300854039068901377?s=20
Quite why they couldn't just leave it at socialism without the Soviet symbol I dont know.0 -
Black Candidates Are Now Winning in Mostly White Districts, Opening Path to Higher Office.
More than two dozen new contenders are going up for election in November
Black candidates have begun winning more House seats and statewide offices, such as attorney general, in places where most voters are white—a departure from decades in which Black political power was rooted largely in minority communities.
Officials and political analysts say these recent victories could position Black candidates to win the highest statewide offices. There have been only two elected Black governors and six senators since Reconstruction.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/black-candidates-are-now-winning-in-mostly-white-districts-opening-path-to-higher-office-115989803520 -
I'll buy the spread on 8% MT/NV (Trump margin in MT + Biden margin in NV) if anyone is selling0
-
On the subject of Tesla I wouldn't invest at current prices but nor would I assume they're necessarily overvalued either. As far as I can tell Tesla have a few significant advantages over their rivals that mean in the future they could make more earnings relative to their market share.
- More proprietary technology.
- Vertical integration
- Batteries
- They're not just a car manufacturer anymore. They're diversifying into the energy industry as a whole.
- They're constantly innovating so like their powerwalls you own a share of any future Tesla subsidiaries without them requiring to sell more cars.
1 - More proprietary technology.
-
A pretty diverse group of people who nonetheless mysteriously manage to make the key manifesto planks of any movement they infiltrate exactly the same. E.g.rottenborough said:
Not all XR supporters are going to take this view though. It's a pretty diverse set of sub-groups and people.kle4 said:
Stunning revelation.CarlottaVance said:Mr Herdson nails it:
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1300854039068901377?s=20
Quite why they couldn't just leave it at socialism without the Soviet symbol I dont know.
'The Campaign for Better Buses'
1. Abolish capitalism.
2. Abolish capitalism.
3. Abolish capitalism.
4. Decolonize buses.
5. Something something Israel.
.
.
.
.
369. What is a bus again?4 -
0
-
I am so glad I got into Apple in 2011 and Tesla in 2016
0 -
JCL.CorrectHorseBattery said:I am so glad I got into Apple in 2011 and Tesla in 2016
I bought into Apple way before that.0 -
UK cases - scaled to 100k population
Note: Scottish case data by specimen date not being provided to PHE
0 -
UK cases - absolute
Note: Scottish case data by specimen date not being provided to PHE
0 -
UK summary data (specimen date) and UK all settings death data (by day of death)
Scottish data being provided at these aggregate levels.
0 -
You must be rich!TheScreamingEagles said:
JCL.CorrectHorseBattery said:I am so glad I got into Apple in 2011 and Tesla in 2016
I bought into Apple way before that.0 -
I'd like to be able to buy a couple of hundred of SpaceX stock, I think in the near term Starlink and longer term Asteroid mining (For rare earths) is going to give them a literally out of this world valuation. They're not public though (They'd be worth loads more if they were) so it's not super simple.
Mars for show, asteroids for dough.0 -
Not so long ago, Hasbro was more valuable than some of the "big" US car makers.Pulpstar said:
Tesla being worth more than pretty much the rest of the car industry combined is a hell of a reach too. Assumes we'll all be getting Teslas when the industry goes electric - currently the french (Renault (Owned by Nissan I think ?)/Peugeot) look to be offering models below any of Tesla's price points.TheScreamingEagles said:
Uber's really does confound and vex me.Pulpstar said:Apple's 2T valuation is a lot more sensible than Tesla's 500B, or Uber's 60B.
I have also have huge concerns about the valuation of Netflix.
Nissan's market cap is 15.8 billion compared to Tesla 446 billion !0 -
0
-
Yes, the way Trump wins is 2016 to the max. His vote efficiency was supreme in 2016, it is not implausible to improve on that further to universe beating levels. Biden gets close all across traditionally red state but not over the line which gives a huge pop lead but Trump still edges all the stated he held in 2016.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Ironically, it's potentially good news for Trump in a sense if his leads in states that aren't going to be pivotal are fairly small as it suggests his vote nationally is efficiently distributed. Unless it's a blow-out election, Trump will win Montana anyway and it makes no difference if that's by a single or double figure margin. Equally, it's potentially bad news for Biden - there's no benefit in losing Montana marginally rather than massively and he'd rather have those votes in Michigan.DAlexander said:
Trump won Montana by over 20% last time.HYUFD said:
Biden could do with some closer polling margins in California and New York whilst retaining a national lead. There does look to be some risk he's distributing his vote inefficiently.
I mean, I get that a close poll in Montana could mean Biden is getting an 8% swing across the country, but the national polls don't support that (although they show him in a decent position).
Boom. Trump second term.2
This discussion has been closed.