Why Isn’t Labour Cutting Through? – politicalbetting.com
Why Isn’t Labour Cutting Through? – politicalbetting.com
The Shadow Chancellor’s response to Sunak’s updated support package this week was well made. Ms Dodds has been saying much the same these past few months, if sotto voce. Perhaps because of this – and despite Starmer generally getting the better of the PM at PMQs – Labour has not broken through in the polls. The Tories’ large leads have largely evaporated so that is something. But the question remains. Why hasn’t Labour made more of an impact?
Comments
-
The problem is that Starmer is Labour's "John Major" - a grey man who excites no-one and is duller than a dull thing on a dull day.
He is so easy to ignore. Only the Lib Dems are worse. It also does not help that we have a performing monkey who loves the limelight as PM.
And whilst I remember...
First!0 -
As much as helping the bottom decile is important and it's understandable that the government's opponents are attacking them on free school meals, that isn't what decides elections.
Black Wednesday was an utter disaster for the Tories because it affected the 80% in the middle. The Tories basically said to the public, we'll hike up your mortgage payments to pay for our pro-Euro ideology.
Starmer et al need to think about how they're going to appeal to the lower-middle classes. Perhaps Brexit will offer Labour a chance similar to that provided by Black Wednesday, but Labour need to focus on the people who decide elections. As nice as Marcus Rashford is, the people he's focussing on don't decide elections.2 -
Another good post from from Ms Cyclefree, and of course she's quite right; Labour isn't cutting though. I think we maybe haven't enough 'credit' for the situation to the fact that Labour's last leader made a bog of it, and led the Party to a bruising defeat less than a year ago.
And, belatedly, Good Morning fellow larks!0 -
Good morning, everyone.
King Cole, is it early enough to be considered a lark?0 -
I've issued a decree to that effect!Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
King Cole, is it early enough to be considered a lark?0 -
I'm not sure that is quite right about Black Wednesday. I think it was about the past more than the future. Not that HMG demanded future sacrifice but that it had already hurt people -- high interest rates; negative equity; lost jobs; lost homes -- in support of the ERM and was now telling people it had all been for nothing.tlg86 said:As much as helping the bottom decile is important and it's understandable that the government's opponents are attacking them on free school meals, that isn't what decides elections.
Black Wednesday was an utter disaster for the Tories because it affected the 80% in the middle. The Tories basically said to the public, we'll hike up your mortgage payments to pay for our pro-Euro ideology.
Starmer et al need to think about how they're going to appeal to the lower-middle classes. Perhaps Brexit will offer Labour a chance similar to that provided by Black Wednesday, but Labour need to focus on the people who decide elections. As nice as Marcus Rashford is, the people he's focussing on don't decide elections.
Today's equivalent would be a backlash against Boris/SNP/Welsh Labour if the lockdowns, lost jobs and other sacrifices do not make a dent in the pandemic, though in this case a vaccine might yet ride to their rescue.
There were other factors, of course. One was that it impacted the government's natural supporters. Mrs Thatcher had done a great deal of harm to people who did not support her in the first place so the electoral consequences were minimal. Black Wednesday, or rather the economic measures leading up to it, had hurt savers, home buyers and entrepreneurs, the sort of people who would normally place their X in the blue box.
That may be why the government can get away with not feeding children. Families who depend on free school meals probably do not vote Conservative so cannot withdraw their support, although superforecasters might want to check red wall Brexit supporters.0 -
WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/1 -
All fairly obvious despite the wfh cheerleading that was dominant here early in the year. On the flip side it does result in reduced costs and increased flexibility for both business and employee, so some productivity loss could be absorbed and it still be a better solution.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
The trend for wfh is clearly here to stay, and will increase over time, but the office and office life is far from dead.1 -
Back on topic. Labour's problem, or one of them, is that on the great issue of the day, it offers no alternative.
Even if voters agree that Boris is making a right mess of things, Labour is not saying it would do anything else; just that its tiers, lockdowns and financial support would be a bit better. More efficient, more humane, perhaps even more effective, but not fundamentally different.1 -
Good header cyclefree. Can't disagree with any of it. Starmer could do worse than studying it. If Corbyn did anything positive it's remind people that it takes much longer to build a brand than destroy one.0
-
On topic, I think one of the key real reasons (the others being natural support for the govt in a crisis and Corbyn) has been missed, namely Brexit. Until it is "done", the promise of doing it is worth several % points to the govt polling. Once it is done, it will be judged far more on its implementation and track record than its promises.
Logically we will therefore extend the decision to just post the 2024 election, although no idea how they achieve that. Not long to find out.
I dont think the Labour party being more vocal and critical would help them at all, probably the opposite, they have the balance about right (apart from in Wales!).2 -
One problem is that even if WFH does mean reduced costs for business, as the article goes on to say, it may be those jobs will be offshored as the next logical step. Good for those firms perhaps, bad for the economy as a whole.noneoftheabove said:
All fairly obvious despite the wfh cheerleading that was dominant here early in the year. On the flip side it does result in reduced costs and increased flexibility for both business and employee, so some productivity loss could be absorbed and it still be a better solution.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
The trend for wfh is clearly here to stay, and will increase over time, but the office and office life is far from dead.
More subtly, even if there is no loss of employment so WFH employees keep their savings, that can be bad for the wider economy, especially if they save instead of spend (for all that @rcs1000 deplores low household savings rates). No spending means no VAT is paid; no money circulates through the economy; essential services need more subsidies (eg railways need more money because no-one is buying season tickets but the trains still need to run).0 -
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.0 -
Brexit is important as you say. For one thing, Brexit and the pandemic sort of cancel each other out, in that the government can blame the adverse consequences of one thing on the other. Yes, your neighbour has lost her job but is that because of the pandemic which HMG can't help or because of Brexit which you voted for? Not our fault anyway so keep voting blue and don't blame Boris. It may well be we end up with an extended transition period under a different name, with interim sector-by-sector deals.noneoftheabove said:On topic, I think one of the key real reasons (the others being natural support for the govt in a crisis and Corbyn) has been missed, namely Brexit. Until it is "done", the promise of doing it is worth several % points to the govt polling. Once it is done, it will be judged far more on its implementation and track record than its promises.
Logically we will therefore extend the decision to just post the 2024 election, although no idea how they achieve that. Not long to find out.
I dont think the Labour party being more vocal and critical would help them at all, probably the opposite, they have the balance about right (apart from in Wales!).0 -
Only a small business, but we have decided if anyone leaves, we wont replace them, at least until a return to the office a couple of days a week is comfortable for all. Short term, we are doing better from wfh, but long term it is unlikely to be the full solution for most.DecrepiterJohnL said:
One problem is that even if WFH does mean reduced costs for business, as the article goes on to say, it may be those jobs will be offshored as the next logical step. Good for those firms perhaps, bad for the economy as a whole.noneoftheabove said:
All fairly obvious despite the wfh cheerleading that was dominant here early in the year. On the flip side it does result in reduced costs and increased flexibility for both business and employee, so some productivity loss could be absorbed and it still be a better solution.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
The trend for wfh is clearly here to stay, and will increase over time, but the office and office life is far from dead.
More subtly, even if there is no loss of employment so WFH employees keep their savings, that can be bad for the wider economy, especially if they save instead of spend (for all that @rcs1000 deplores low household savings rates). No spending means no VAT is paid; no money circulates through the economy; essential services need more subsidies (eg railways need more money because no-one is buying season tickets but the trains still need to run).0 -
The choice, in the long run, for many people is between working from the office (WFO) and being unemployed at home, not between WFO and WFH. This has been so hard to accept, but the reality is starting to bite.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
As far as Labour is concerned, voters are looking at Wales where nonessential purchases in shops and many English visitors are banned, and at London where the Mayor is trying to push down the economy and the transport system even more. If this shows what a Labour government would be like, it is not an enticing prospect. The Labour vision seems to involve shutting down much of the country and huge public borrowing, which is not realistic. They have not shown how they would control the public deficits.3 -
0
-
I don't think that, yet, the Welsh experience is starting to impinge too much. What will change minds is an increase in cases and and a fall in deaths.
Which will happen as, for example, University cases fall, and students return to normality.0 -
It is not that Labour offers a worse programme of lockdowns and borrowing but that it offers much the same programme. Even if voters think SKS's tiers will be more logical than Boris's, or a 10pm curfew should be 9pm or 11pm, the broad principles are the same.fox327 said:
The choice, in the long run, for many people is between working from the office (WFO) and being unemployed at home, not between WFO and WFH. This has been so hard to accept, but the reality is starting to bite.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
As far as Labour is concerned, voters are looking at Wales where nonessential purchases in shops and many English visitors are banned, and at London where the Mayor is trying to push down the economy and the transport system even more. If this shows what a Labour government would be like, it is not an enticing prospect. The Labour vision seems to involve shutting down much of the country and huge public borrowing, which is not realistic. They have not shown how they would control the public deficits.
Boris's local lockdowns and tiers 2 and 3 are not noticeably different from the Welsh firebreak, and what's the difference between a firebreak and the circuit breakers Starmer advocates? What's the difference between Boris's three tiers and Nicola Sturgeon's five? It is all the same thing, more or less.2 -
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.6 -
Imagine its quite high on the UK wishlist, and on the flip side, the EU (incl EEA and Swiss) make up 29% of UK passenger arrivals so there is little point making them queue up in the rest of world lanes. Sadly, politically trading 0.5% of future GDP in exchange for this benefit we already had will make sense, as it is one of the most visible ways people will judge Brexit on and impacts the vast majority of voters (unlike someone in particular losing their job).OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.0 -
Trump at 3 on the exchange. This is an important psychological barrier. I'm hoping for a rebound and then I'll get back in.0
-
I suspect....... strongly suspect......... that the effect of Mr NotA's first sentence hasn't permeated through the mind of the cabinet member responsible for border security.noneoftheabove said:
Imagine its quite high on the UK wishlist, and on the flip side, the EU (incl EEA and Swiss) make up 29% of UK passenger arrivals so there is little point making them queue up in the rest of world lanes. Sadly, politically trading 0.5% of future GDP in exchange for this benefit we already had will make sense, as it is one of the most visible ways people will judge Brexit on and impacts the vast majority of voters (unlike someone in particular losing their job).OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.0 -
The government really do struggle with the concept that Brexit means Brexit, don't they?OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
Starmer is proving pretty dull and ineffective, following his early "not Corbyn" boost. I would like to see more of Ms Rayner, who is a star in the making. Favourite for next Labour leader, and 250/1 as next PM. Effectively that is a vote on Starmer going and Johnson staying, but a good value longshot IMO.0 -
Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.4
-
Ben Bradley MP for Mansfield is interesting in this respect. He has been outspoken since he became an MP and spmewhat gaffe prone at times. His seat was Labour not long ago and then a tight marginal - at the GE he pushed the majority to around 16000.DecrepiterJohnL said:
I'm not sure that is quite right about Black Wednesday. I think it was about the past more than the future. Not that HMG demanded future sacrifice but that it had already hurt people -- high interest rates; negative equity; lost jobs; lost homes -- in support of the ERM and was now telling people it had all been for nothing.tlg86 said:As much as helping the bottom decile is important and it's understandable that the government's opponents are attacking them on free school meals, that isn't what decides elections.
Black Wednesday was an utter disaster for the Tories because it affected the 80% in the middle. The Tories basically said to the public, we'll hike up your mortgage payments to pay for our pro-Euro ideology.
Starmer et al need to think about how they're going to appeal to the lower-middle classes. Perhaps Brexit will offer Labour a chance similar to that provided by Black Wednesday, but Labour need to focus on the people who decide elections. As nice as Marcus Rashford is, the people he's focussing on don't decide elections.
Today's equivalent would be a backlash against Boris/SNP/Welsh Labour if the lockdowns, lost jobs and other sacrifices do not make a dent in the pandemic, though in this case a vaccine might yet ride to their rescue.
There were other factors, of course. One was that it impacted the government's natural supporters. Mrs Thatcher had done a great deal of harm to people who did not support her in the first place so the electoral consequences were minimal. Black Wednesday, or rather the economic measures leading up to it, had hurt savers, home buyers and entrepreneurs, the sort of people who would normally place their X in the blue box.
That may be why the government can get away with not feeding children. Families who depend on free school meals probably do not vote Conservative so cannot withdraw their support, although superforecasters might want to check red wall Brexit supporters.0 -
Large numbers of overcrowded airport terminals are not the most likeley of problems we are going to see in the next few months.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.1 -
There is much that you are correct on politically in that statement, the UK and England in particular is and always has been a long way away from Corbynism. But it is not just the poor who want endless benefits and govt handouts. The triple lock is the worst example of this, wanting an ever increasing share of the pie for the richest cohort in society at the expense of the working age population who get the ever declining share.felix said:Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.
0 -
And also the same as in most European coiuntries now - my own little village in SE Spain has had a Covid spike this week and from Sunday it is under semi-lockdown with Guardia Civil drafted in to enforce it. Happening all over. Unlike much of the UK media I think a fair number of ordinary folk realise there is no magic bullet anywhere right now.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is not that Labour offers a worse programme of lockdowns and borrowing but that it offers much the same programme. Even if voters think SKS's tiers will be more logical than Boris's, or a 10pm curfew should be 9pm or 11pm, the broad principles are the same.fox327 said:
The choice, in the long run, for many people is between working from the office (WFO) and being unemployed at home, not between WFO and WFH. This has been so hard to accept, but the reality is starting to bite.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
As far as Labour is concerned, voters are looking at Wales where nonessential purchases in shops and many English visitors are banned, and at London where the Mayor is trying to push down the economy and the transport system even more. If this shows what a Labour government would be like, it is not an enticing prospect. The Labour vision seems to involve shutting down much of the country and huge public borrowing, which is not realistic. They have not shown how they would control the public deficits.
Boris's local lockdowns and tiers 2 and 3 are not noticeably different from the Welsh firebreak, and what's the difference between a firebreak and the circuit breakers Starmer advocates? What's the difference between Boris's three tiers and Nicola Sturgeon's five? It is all the same thing, more or less.2 -
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.3 -
The first time they are delayed that will be their reaction yes, by 2024 on their sixth or seventh 2 hour extra queue its unlikely to be a positive for the govt.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.0 -
I have benefited personally from that ever since I retired - from all governments. The fact is pensioners vote in higher numbers than any other group - as they die out they are replaced by new ones with much the same mindset. The younger folk prefer twitter and other things to voting - otherwise there'd have been no Brexit. The solution is clear.noneoftheabove said:
There is much that you are correct on politically in that statement, the UK and England in particular is and always has been a long way away from Corbynism. But it is not just the poor who want endless benefits and govt handouts. The triple lock is the worst example of this, wanting an ever increasing share of the pie for the richest cohort in society at the expense of the working age population who get the ever declining share.felix said:Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.
0 -
Doubt it - even if it is still the case by then. Countries like Spain are so desperate for UK visitors they will not risk putting them off. The market will sort out this problem - if it even happens. As I said I've yet to hear any leave voter here or elsewhere show any interest in it.noneoftheabove said:
The first time they are delayed that will be their reaction yes, by 2024 on their sixth or seventh 2 hour extra queue its unlikely to be a positive for the govt.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.2 -
Of course I understand why the triple lock is popular with pensioners, and why they will probably even get their 10-20% bonus rise through next year. I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the biggest non working bloc voting for an ever increasing share of the pie for themselves whilst moaning about the kids of feckless parents getting a sandwich.felix said:
I have benefited personally from that ever since I retired - from all governments. The fact is pensioners vote in higher numbers than any other group - as they die out they are replaced by new ones with much the same mindset. The younger folk prefer twitter and other things to voting - otherwise there'd have been no Brexit. The solution is clear.noneoftheabove said:
There is much that you are correct on politically in that statement, the UK and England in particular is and always has been a long way away from Corbynism. But it is not just the poor who want endless benefits and govt handouts. The triple lock is the worst example of this, wanting an ever increasing share of the pie for the richest cohort in society at the expense of the working age population who get the ever declining share.felix said:Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.
6 -
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.0 -
At tourist airports, it won't make much difference, as nearly all flights are from EU, and desks flexible as to which plane has just arrived.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
It is more of an issue for commercial travellers, but when is that coming back?
The government needs to promote domestic tourism for next year. Flying is off for a while.2 -
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
1 -
The current state of play on covid. Steroids, anticoagulation, lots of fluid replacement, CPAP and proning. Not much else seems to be adding anything at the moment.
https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1319892663370469377?s=193 -
Business travel matters too. We should be planning for rapid growth post lockdown. Someone will need to pay the bills. Our recovery will be slower if travel to and from the uk is a pain.Foxy said:
At tourist airports, it won't make much difference, as nearly all flights are from EU, and desks flexible as to which plane has just arrived.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
It is more of an issue for commercial travellers, but when is that coming back?
The government needs to promote domestic tourism for next year. Flying is off for a while.
Is the government planning? Probably not. Would the government help or hinder the recovery? Probably the latter.0 -
I'm willing to bet the people most affected did not vote for Brexit in the first place.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is just playing politics, the government gets to say "we tried, and those meanies said no", while the rest of us get on with our lives.1 -
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.2
-
My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.6 -
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.0 -
Blocked and reported.rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.2 -
Having nearly missed my connection in Italy due to an hour in a passport queue, and indeed usually held up for a time at all the other airports I have used in the EU, I’m not sure anyone will notice a difference. We were never in the Schengen Agreement.noneoftheabove said:
The first time they are delayed that will be their reaction yes, by 2024 on their sixth or seventh 2 hour extra queue its unlikely to be a positive for the govt.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.1 -
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.Jonathan said:
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.0 -
Yes, I am sure that is true. For many Brexiteers, Brexit will have little direct influence on their lives. They will pick up their pensions as normal, and on the rare occasion that it is used will like their blue passport and Britons only channel at the airport.brokenwheel said:
I'm willing to bet the people most affected did not vote for Brexit in the first place.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
Only a small minority of the public will feel the direct effect of Brexit, so overall it will be similar to other bits of voting, falling on others, such as taxing the rich or allowing poor kids to go hungry.2 -
The reality is that opinion polls are irrelevant at present, there is no election due. Also there is not a single country in the mainstream world that has a solution to the virus, you can’t vote it away. Yes HNG is crap at communication, keeps changing its mind but people have come to accept it obeying the bits of the regulations that suit them. I’d like to see focus on keeping the health service operating beyond covid by some kind of separation, it would be good to have the 1.5 million who volunteered earlier in the year deployed again to help those shielding, can we bang up quarantine dodgers please? I’m sure there is more that could alleviate some of the problems but they aren’t vote shifters, at present we hope for a vaccine and concentrate on treatments there is not a lot else.1
-
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.Metatron said:However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
1 -
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.0 -
FPT
It is also potentially counter to health, since a lot of people will rely on DIY or gardening or craft or reading or board games or whatever to get them through the isolation of lockdown.alex_ said:Wales: what I don’t get about the nonsense going on in Wales is that the Welsh govt are not attempting to justify the extreme restrictions (re:non essential goods) on public health grounds. If they said supermarkets couldn’t sell “non essential” goods because they are trying to prevent people leaving the house as much as possible then fair enough. I don’t agree with it, but one can (just about) construct a public health argument around it (on the basis that people might do it outside of a “standard” food shop).
But they are going beyond that and trying to say it is about “fairness” to those businesses forced to close. Which seems to me designed to test the limits of public support. And if the suggestions about restrictions on what supermarkets can sell on line are true - well I just can’t for the life of me work out how that can be legal. And what the justification is. Are they saying a specialist computer retailer can sell a computer online, but a supermarket can’t? A clothes retailer can sell a tea shirt but a supermarket can’t? Or are the computer and clothes retailers banned as well? Fundamentally it’s got nothing to do with public health. Covid is sh*t for a lot of businesses. Especially small ones without an online presence. But the best you can do with those is compensate them as much as possible. But trying to distort the natural market instead will do little for them but just cause further economic damage and hardship for everyone. For no obvious public health purpose.
All that is left is drink.
Really, that is the biggest mistake of all.
2 -
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.felix said:
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.Jonathan said:
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.0 -
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.0 -
Whatever else one can say about Brexit, the idea that holiday makers are going to get worked up about not being able to use E-gates is IMO hardly going to register.
For a start, existence of e-gates at airports is hardly universal (and their existence is more common on arrival back in the UK than on arrival at holiday destinations in the EU). Secondly, even where they exist, many people still don't use them. Especially abroad where it is often difficult to work out if you can, as the instructions tend to be in foreign languages. Thirdly it's not completely an inaccurate national stereotype that the average Brit secretly likes queuing (and complaining about it).
And finally the reasons for e-gates won't go away. They are a cost saver for airports, and a benefit for travellers. So any airport that sees mass arrivals from the UK is going to want them - and ultimately it will be sorted out.1 -
It is going to be a choice of someone as dull as diitchwater or a bunch of absolutely useless crooks. Like last election it is likely people will choose the least bad option and opt for ditchwater.DecrepiterJohnL said:
I'm not sure that is quite right about Black Wednesday. I think it was about the past more than the future. Not that HMG demanded future sacrifice but that it had already hurt people -- high interest rates; negative equity; lost jobs; lost homes -- in support of the ERM and was now telling people it had all been for nothing.tlg86 said:As much as helping the bottom decile is important and it's understandable that the government's opponents are attacking them on free school meals, that isn't what decides elections.
Black Wednesday was an utter disaster for the Tories because it affected the 80% in the middle. The Tories basically said to the public, we'll hike up your mortgage payments to pay for our pro-Euro ideology.
Starmer et al need to think about how they're going to appeal to the lower-middle classes. Perhaps Brexit will offer Labour a chance similar to that provided by Black Wednesday, but Labour need to focus on the people who decide elections. As nice as Marcus Rashford is, the people he's focussing on don't decide elections.
Today's equivalent would be a backlash against Boris/SNP/Welsh Labour if the lockdowns, lost jobs and other sacrifices do not make a dent in the pandemic, though in this case a vaccine might yet ride to their rescue.
There were other factors, of course. One was that it impacted the government's natural supporters. Mrs Thatcher had done a great deal of harm to people who did not support her in the first place so the electoral consequences were minimal. Black Wednesday, or rather the economic measures leading up to it, had hurt savers, home buyers and entrepreneurs, the sort of people who would normally place their X in the blue box.
That may be why the government can get away with not feeding children. Families who depend on free school meals probably do not vote Conservative so cannot withdraw their support, although superforecasters might want to check red wall Brexit supporters.0 -
I respect your willingness to mess with the moderatorsbrokenwheel said:
Blocked and reported.rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
1 -
On topic, there is clearly still an element of rallying round.
It isn't yet clear that we have done significantly worse than many other countries. The first wave case and deaths totals were certainly worse, largely due to the cock up on care homes, but this didn't really cut through and now the story is the second wave that is hitting everywhere, with only a few countries so far noticeably less affected. The view that Bozo may not be brilliant but everywhere is doing badly is widespread.
Unlike the US, we are not in election mode and hence the opposition is pulling its punches. It would be easy to make a video highlighting all the chopping and changing and Bozo bluster that we have endured since the crisis started, similar to those the Dems have thrown at Trump, but now isnt the time.
Labour ought, going on historical precedent, to be better placed to 'win the peace'. Assuming they actually have a plan. The logic, other than electoral, of taking on pensioners and the wealthy in order to achieve both fairness and financial stability surely points in that direction.1 -
That was part of the joke.rcs1000 said:
I respect your willingness to mess with the moderatorsbrokenwheel said:
Blocked and reported.rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
0 -
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.JohnLilburne said:
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.Metatron said:However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
1 -
True - but of all the obstacles we will face in doing international business in future, from paperwork through tariff and non-tariff barriers and a trashed national reputation, businesspeople having to queue a little longer at the airport is well down the list.Jonathan said:
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.felix said:
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.Jonathan said:
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.1 -
To be far, this is nothing to do with Schengen: a Brit travelling from one Schengen country to another won't need to show their passport because that is the nature of Schengen. It bestows no rights nor obligations on individuals, it merely determines the level of control at certain crossings.Fysics_Teacher said:
Having nearly missed my connection in Italy due to an hour in a passport queue, and indeed usually held up for a time at all the other airports I have used in the EU, I’m not sure anyone will notice a difference. We were never in the Schengen Agreement.noneoftheabove said:
The first time they are delayed that will be their reaction yes, by 2024 on their sixth or seventh 2 hour extra queue its unlikely to be a positive for the govt.felix said:
As a remainer myself all I have noted thus far is other remainers talking about it. My guess would be that most leavers will not give a s*** about it if and when it happens. Those that do will blame the EU for being petty.OnlyLivingBoy said:
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.OldKingCole said:Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it.
So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
Leaving the e-passport gate scheme, due to not having a data sharing agreement will be a small but meaningful hassle for some travellers.
0 -
You’re wrong. Convenience for executive board members is a big factor in investment decisions. Being an hours taxi ride from Heathrow or City has been a key driver. If we’re pain in the arse to do business with and travelling is a faff I assure you it will make a difference.IanB2 said:
True - but of all the obstacles we will face in doing international business in future, from paperwork through tariff and non-tariff barriers and a trashed national reputation, businesspeople having to queue a little longer at the airport is well down the list.Jonathan said:
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.felix said:
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.Jonathan said:
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
0 -
I would think having 5 tiers gives you more control and where possible at the lowest level areas allow more normal life. Having just 3 means your bottom rung is much higher and too easy to end up in the top one.DecrepiterJohnL said:
It is not that Labour offers a worse programme of lockdowns and borrowing but that it offers much the same programme. Even if voters think SKS's tiers will be more logical than Boris's, or a 10pm curfew should be 9pm or 11pm, the broad principles are the same.fox327 said:
The choice, in the long run, for many people is between working from the office (WFO) and being unemployed at home, not between WFO and WFH. This has been so hard to accept, but the reality is starting to bite.DecrepiterJohnL said:WFH might cause permanent damage.
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
"They are also having real problems training new staff. There's only so much you can do over a video link, and new recruits aren't getting all that vital experience of working alongside experienced colleagues and picking up all the things you get from watching how someone else does the job."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/23/government-fears-working-home-lockdown-hitting-uk-economy-hard/
As far as Labour is concerned, voters are looking at Wales where nonessential purchases in shops and many English visitors are banned, and at London where the Mayor is trying to push down the economy and the transport system even more. If this shows what a Labour government would be like, it is not an enticing prospect. The Labour vision seems to involve shutting down much of the country and huge public borrowing, which is not realistic. They have not shown how they would control the public deficits.
Boris's local lockdowns and tiers 2 and 3 are not noticeably different from the Welsh firebreak, and what's the difference between a firebreak and the circuit breakers Starmer advocates? What's the difference between Boris's three tiers and Nicola Sturgeon's five? It is all the same thing, more or less.1 -
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.0 -
Agree with @nichomar - the polls aren't moving and it doesn't matter because there is an eternity to the election. Three things need to happen before we can start to see how things will play out:
1. Brexit. A lot of punters still want "Brexit". What they think it is and what it actually is aren't the same thing, but there is still a chance that Shagger will utterly capitulate and simply lipstick the pig, in which case the "we're the EU's bitch" model of Brexit may be seen as a great triumph. Alternately no deal, the rapid shutting down of the economy and *then* capitulation. Hard to tell what will happen yet.
2. Covid. As @Cyclefree points out in her great piece Labour hasn't found the attack line that will cut through. TBH I'm not sure Starmer is capable of cutting a great line through even if they find one. Difficult to play politics with the pox - the government couldn't fuck this up harder if it tried, but there isn't an obvious winning strategy to defeat the thing.
3. Players. Shagger widely reported as not being up for staying on for long. The Rise and Fall of Reggie Sunak. The planned revenge of the Corbynites. The SNP Salmond skulduggery. A lot of moving pieces.
In short I am not surprised that the political status quo is largely holding up. We can all point to the things that *might* change things - and letting kids starve is definitely one of them - but hard to tell what will cut through when so many things are in flux.2 -
Devolution is saving Johnson's bacon. Keir would have to be selling the claim that his superpowers eclipsed those of Drakeford and Sturgeon as well as Johnson, to persuade us that he could do markedly better.0
-
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.0 -
I thought you liked raving flag waving nationalists.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.3 -
It is a joke that relies on you knowing that Singer is a famous maker of sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I’m assuming here that your comment was not itself a joke that I didn’t get...1 -
-
And it's not unique in protecting pensioners from the pain inflicted upon everyone else. Look at Council Tax Benefit (renamed Support) - each year the proportion of Council Tax that low income families are required to pay increases, as local authorities trim their budgets and cut back the support on offer. Yet low income pensioners are all exempt and, uniquely, have their Council Tax paid in full, thanks to Cameron's promise, when even the low income disabled and unemployed are made to pay up.noneoftheabove said:
There is much that you are correct on politically in that statement, the UK and England in particular is and always has been a long way away from Corbynism. But it is not just the poor who want endless benefits and govt handouts. The triple lock is the worst example of this, wanting an ever increasing share of the pie for the richest cohort in society at the expense of the working age population who get the ever declining share.felix said:Interesting thread header - I would say that Labour's caution is understandable. Starmer is not much less left-wing than Corbyn in reality but is bright enough to realise that the voters are in a different place. I think he is terrified to be explicit on Labour's programme. Some polling yesterday showed that even Labour voters continue to take a very hard line on immigration. That is just one example. Further, there remains a massive gulf between the media narrative and where people are. Yes the public has lost faith in Boris - but that is very different from accepting the sort of narrative on Europe, immigration , etc we see on twittter or on here. I'm not even convinced how many of those who are not that far above the school meals threshold go along with the endless demands for more and more in benefits for those who many of them perceive as feckless. Yes the chatterering middle classes in the metropolitan areas love it all - but I'm not sure they speak for Jo public that much who cling to the naive idea that parents should be feeding their own children.
1 -
A load of bobbins.SandraMc said:0 -
One from the Tim Vine school of comedy.Fysics_Teacher said:
It is a joke that relies on you knowing that Singer is a famous maker of sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I’m assuming here that your comment was not itself a joke that I didn’t get...0 -
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)Jonathan said:
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.felix said:
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.Jonathan said:
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.felix said:
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.Jonathan said:Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.1 -
As I'm sure you all know, the US has just reported its highest number of daily Covid infections (80,000) since the pandemic began, surpassing the previous July peak.
It's absolutely the wrong timing for Donald Trump and another reason why you should be betting on Joe Biden and his coat tails.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/23/health/us-coronavirus-friday/index.html
0 -
Somewhere Ydoethur is stirring, will be gutted to miss a pun fest.IanB2 said:
One from the Tim Vine school of comedy.Fysics_Teacher said:
It is a joke that relies on you knowing that Singer is a famous maker of sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I’m assuming here that your comment was not itself a joke that I didn’t get...0 -
Is it fair to say that this is a benefit of having a national system like the NHS ?Foxy said:The current state of play on covid. Steroids, anticoagulation, lots of fluid replacement, CPAP and proning. Not much else seems to be adding anything at the moment.
https://twitter.com/rupert_pearse/status/1319892663370469377?s=19
We do seem to have been remarkably successful in producing useful hospital clinical trial results - both positive (dexamethasome) and negative (“the hydroxy”) - in a way that the far better funded, but more chaotic US system hasn’t.0 -
On the question why Labour isn't cutting through.
Perhaps Keir and Andy could have a word.0 -
This is a betting site, in case you forgot the fact.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.0 -
.
With that poster, occupation, analysis and even geographical location depends a bit on what day of the week it is.IanB2 said:
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.0 -
He's just spinning you a yarn.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.0 -
Is the first comment an invitation to me to write a thread?IanB2 said:
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.
Re. the second, it's not my attention span. Some of the UK-centric threads are so full of wind there's just no point.
This is a betting site and we're days away from the biggest betting event between 2019 and 2024 (probably). Take a leaf out of Mike's book and let's have a swathe of betting opportunity threads in the immediate run up. There are still opportunities around especially as the markets are out of kilter with the polls.0 -
Regarding the Tories' staging of Oliver Twist, "FEED THE KIDS MATT" keeps being scrawled on walls and pavements across Stockton South...0
-
I think he overlocked the pun.Fysics_Teacher said:
It is a joke that relies on you knowing that Singer is a famous maker of sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.
I’m assuming here that your comment was not itself a joke that I didn’t get...0 -
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.0 -
I was 'searching' for my Needles and Pins!SandraMc said:1 -
Mr. G, can cut both ways. More tiers allow a greater degree of gradation but too many could mean changes from one to the other happen more frequently making it harder for businesses and people to be right at any given moment.
I do think the Welsh approach seems nuts.0 -
Singer (the Singer family?) was (is?) a massive company famous for making sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.0 -
Perfectly stated. Thank you.alex_ said:
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.0 -
-
Obama 50/1alex_ said:
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.1 -
That seems about to happen in the US.malcolmg said:
It is going to be a choice of someone as dull as diitchwater or a bunch of absolutely useless crooks. Like last election it is likely people will choose the least bad option and opt for ditchwater.DecrepiterJohnL said:
I'm not sure that is quite right about Black Wednesday. I think it was about the past more than the future. Not that HMG demanded future sacrifice but that it had already hurt people -- high interest rates; negative equity; lost jobs; lost homes -- in support of the ERM and was now telling people it had all been for nothing.tlg86 said:As much as helping the bottom decile is important and it's understandable that the government's opponents are attacking them on free school meals, that isn't what decides elections.
Black Wednesday was an utter disaster for the Tories because it affected the 80% in the middle. The Tories basically said to the public, we'll hike up your mortgage payments to pay for our pro-Euro ideology.
Starmer et al need to think about how they're going to appeal to the lower-middle classes. Perhaps Brexit will offer Labour a chance similar to that provided by Black Wednesday, but Labour need to focus on the people who decide elections. As nice as Marcus Rashford is, the people he's focussing on don't decide elections.
Today's equivalent would be a backlash against Boris/SNP/Welsh Labour if the lockdowns, lost jobs and other sacrifices do not make a dent in the pandemic, though in this case a vaccine might yet ride to their rescue.
There were other factors, of course. One was that it impacted the government's natural supporters. Mrs Thatcher had done a great deal of harm to people who did not support her in the first place so the electoral consequences were minimal. Black Wednesday, or rather the economic measures leading up to it, had hurt savers, home buyers and entrepreneurs, the sort of people who would normally place their X in the blue box.
That may be why the government can get away with not feeding children. Families who depend on free school meals probably do not vote Conservative so cannot withdraw their support, although superforecasters might want to check red wall Brexit supporters.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/23/joe-biden-slow-and-steady-campaign-4320421 -
Really big - almost like Hoover crossed over to become a regular noun and verb.alex_ said:
Singer (the Singer family?) was (is?) a massive company famous for making sewing machines.Gallowgate said:
I don’t get it... 🤷♂️rcs1000 said:My wife has started writing ballards about sewing machines.
She's a Singer songwriter.0 -
Spot onMorris_Dancer said:Mr. 327, well, quite.
https://twitter.com/spike67spike/status/13197913140499169280 -
PB is better at US politics than UK politics IMHO, it's good to have people on the ground but I don't think they've ever been a great source of useful prediction fodder.alex_ said:
I don't think Mysticrose wants more discussion about it for any other reason than this site is called "politicalbetting.com" and there might be some fantastic opportunities out there to make money, if only the collective minds of PB.com would spend more time looking for them and sharing tips.malcolmg said:
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Whether there is actually sufficient knowledge of US politics on the site to achieve that (and overcome the partisan/slanted analyses) is another matter. When we have similar situations in the run up to UK elections there is usually enough genuine on the ground expertise to be able to largely disregard the one sided posters who may be pushing angles.0 -
Why not?Mysticrose said:
Is the first comment an invitation to me to write a thread?IanB2 said:
I thought you were supposed to be a writer?Mysticrose said:More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
All you do is whinge about other people's contributions, in between telling us they are too long for your attention span to actually read.
Re. the second, it's not my attention span. Some of the UK-centric threads are so full of wind there's just no point.
This is a betting site and we're days away from the biggest betting event between 2019 and 2024 (probably). Take a leaf out of Mike's book and let's have a swathe of betting opportunity threads in the immediate run up. There are still opportunities around especially as the markets are out of kilter with the polls.0
