Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Pleased to know that you are diversifying into growing markets in these difficult times.
“...the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media.”
If Tory MPs and lockdown sceptics want to make a difference, they should demand that the Government come clean on the costs of current and future restrictions. They should insist on sound accounting
There are three clauses I’d like to see in public procurement contracts (whether for goods or services) like these:-
1. No contracts to be awarded to companies where any part of the corporate structure is established in a tax haven. Companies should not be benefiting from providing goods/services to the public sector and then be able to avoid paying tax on the profits from such contracts.
2. Penalty clauses in all such contracts. Final payments on such contracts only to be made on a staged basis after a period of time so that final payments are not made until after the contract has been completed and it has been determined that there are no faults with the goods and/or no issues with the services provided. A bit like the bonus provisions in city contracts - where payment is not given until 3 or 5 years after the awards.
3. No dividends to be paid out by the company in relation to the profits from such contracts until final payment as under 2.
There is nothing wrong in principle with private companies providing goods/services to the public sector. But we should do much much more to ensure that they are only paid for providing quality goods/services and that tax is paid in full in this country. The impression now being given is that companies are just gouging the government for money, sending it offshore or out to shareholders and the taxpayer is being short-changed in every sense.
Would clause 2 not unfairly penalise smaller companies who need the cashflow?
No more than such clauses do to individuals. Staged payments are common in other contracts.
If a company is suffering cash flow issues I’d be wondering how they could provide quality stuff and how a penalty clause would work.
What we need to avoid is the “take the money and run” approach which seems to be prevalent.
How much of an issue is taking the money and running and why can't the criminal justice system deal with them?
During a pandemic surely getting much-needed PPE quickly and rapidly is more important than whether some money gets wasted. If you end up leaving doctors short on PPE but you've saved a million then that is a false economy surely?
The answer to your first question is that providing inadequate goods / services is not a criminal matter.
Re your second: if the clauses are drafted in advance and automatically included in such contracts then there should be no issue. You both get the PPE and the ability to recover monies if not provided / tax paid etc.
Whereas in some cases we’ve both wasted the money and not got the PPE which is the worst of all worlds.
The claim that this is an emergency and therefore there is no need for any sort of checks is a pretext used by every fraudster everywhere. Clauses like these should not bother competent companies but they will help weed out snake oil salesmen and fraudsters.
We're in a global pandemic where existing PPE production is a fraction of what is needed. At the start of this pandemic every single week we were consuming a year's worth of PPE every single week - and the PPE demands have gone up not down since then as demand has been increased by more businesses requiring PPE.
I'd like fraudsters prosecuted but having experience in business I can assure you that your claims that clauses should not bother competent companies is absolutely fatuous - it is an undeniable absolute truth that cashflow is the lifeblood of business. You screw with cashflow and you kill even healthy businesses.
If you're so keen on screwing around with cashflow for these businesses pause for one second please and ask yourself if you'd be happy to see the same principles followed with your daughters? If she was ramping up sales 50x as these PPE businesses are then would she be OK to pay her own suppliers up front 50x more cash while having her payments from her customers tied up for months? Could she cope with a surge of cashflow out and no cashflow in for months?
Cashflow is the lifeblood of healthy businesses not just fraudsters Cyclefree.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Keep it up in the name of employment, though, as I'm thinking of taking on someone to pick pineapple back off my pizzas.
But on Tuesday alone, one in every 1,000 residents of North and South Dakota was diagnosed with COVID-19. That’s a per-capita rate of infection nearly double New York State’s during the spring.
If this Imperial College report of 100,000 infections per day in the UK is in anyway accurate then any semblance of the idea that mandatory mask wearing prevents infection must be out of the window.
In regards to the report's accuracy yesterday the testing capacity in the UK yesterday was 440,000, and 280,000 had a test so there is loads of spare capacity. Its likely that 25,000 of those will be postive. That means there are 75,000 people each day getting Covid with absolutely no idea that they have it (or they would have a test). Therefore herd immunity will be achieved well before a vaccine programme is completed.
Those statistics seem very similar to those described by Merkel yesterday. She said that they only knew where 25% of infections were coming from.
And she used it to point out that statements such as "there is little evidence to suggest that covid is spread in restaurants" are unreliable, because the location of infaction is so often unknown.
“...the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media.”
Well, of course it was. That is politics. If you hand your opponents a weapon, don't be surprised when they wield it against you.
If this Imperial College report of 100,000 infections per day in the UK is in anyway accurate then any semblance of the idea that mandatory mask wearing prevents infection must be out of the window.
In regards to the report's accuracy yesterday the testing capacity in the UK yesterday was 440,000, and 280,000 had a test so there is loads of spare capacity. Its likely that 25,000 of those will be postive. That means there are 75,000 people each day getting Covid with absolutely no idea that they have it (or they would have a test). Therefore herd immunity will be achieved well before a vaccine programme is completed.
Those statistics seem very similar to those described by Merkel yesterday. She said that they only knew where 25% of infections were coming from.
And she used it to point out that statements such as "there is little evidence to suggest that covid is spread in restaurants" are unreliable, because the location of infaction is so often unknown.
From the latest ONS data - next update tomorrow
To match the react numbers, that curve is going to take a very scary turn!
Perhaps a dumb question, but does that mean it's actually worse in this wave than the first? Belgium was hit pretty bad the first time round, too...
I would think so, yes. The number of hospitalisations is a good indicator of the true scale of the pandemic regardless of the volume of testing.
This. Probably more constant than the death toll - because treatment may have improved, but hospitalisation criteria probably haven't.
Unless there have been any advances in treatment in the early stages - while the patient is still at home. I haven't heard of any... calling the medics?
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
Well... there is a serious chance of a Jacobite return now that you have! Any news from the ARSE re: next Tuesday?
Good morning Cicero and to other PBers down thread who have commented on my return.
My ARSE is in retirement and is presently enjoying life in New Zealand where its' advice on keeping the nations buttocks and borders firmly closed has proved fruitful.
As to the POTUS election I have been following the proceedings closely and have until election night closed all my positions to excellent advantage and thus facilitate a major shopping spree for Mrs Jack W in numerous retail fleshpots. Accordingly I am in good favour with the Great She Elephant of Chez Auchentennach.
Here are 5 takeaways from the race that have peaked my antennae over the past few days :
1. Outwith the national and state polls the House races are a mine of telling information. Consistent swings to to Dems in the 6-8% range. So goes the House etc ?!?
2. It appears that the fabled 18-30 yr turnout has happened this election - Approx 3-1 in Dem favour.
3. "I've got Georgia on my mind" ... Trending blue more quickly than I thought and the numbers from the Peach State are astonishing. If Georgia goes for Biden then it provides another path to 270 for Biden.
4. Trump went to NE02. Why if its in the bag for just one EC vote?
5. Bloomberg pouring money into Texas and Ohio for Biden and Trump pulling cash from Florida. Trump doesn't need Florida if he can thread the needle again in PA WI and MI and hold the 2016 map. But then Arizona.
If Tory MPs and lockdown sceptics want to make a difference, they should demand that the Government come clean on the costs of current and future restrictions. They should insist on sound accounting
There are three clauses I’d like to see in public procurement contracts (whether for goods or services) like these:-
1. No contracts to be awarded to companies where any part of the corporate structure is established in a tax haven. Companies should not be benefiting from providing goods/services to the public sector and then be able to avoid paying tax on the profits from such contracts.
As a matter of morality I don't disagree, but the turbulence of the public sector removing all Microsoft products from use will be significant, not only because of Office, but also because of how much runs on Azure, particularly since Amazon WS as the main competitor would also be off the table.
Well, let’s start with companies bidding for new contracts and then think about existing ones.
When I did some work last year for a company (not even the government) I had to confirm that payment would not be made to any company registered outside the U.K. which of course I did.
Making it clear to companies that use of tax havens to minimise the tax paid to the British Treasury on money earned from the British taxpayer will be a very big no-no when they come sniffing for contracts is the least we can expect when money, as we are constantly being told, is tight and businesses here in distress are being told that there is not enough around to help them.
A question of fairness I feel.
The problem will be with any international company. How do you define tax haven, and using it to reduce tax payable on (a) the project in question (b) any other work.
Is moving profits to a lower tax jurisdiction *always* an issue?
I agree with the basic idea - just trying to see how the implementation would work.
A tax haven is any country you use to minimise tax liabilities. Which country you use depends which taxes you are trying to avoid and how. Almost any country can be used as a tax haven and the names that crop up might surprise a lot of people. It's been a while since I practiced but we used to use regularly The Netherlands for dividend-mixing, Germany for group relief manoeuvres [memorably known as Organschaft] and of course the UK interest relief provisions were highly beneficial in a wide range of circumstances.
It was all lawful avoidance of course but indisputably it reduced the tax take of the Exchequers involved which tried to combat it, principally in two ways. First there was the 'sniper' approach. Each tax avoidance wheeze was met by specific legislation outlawing it. Secondly, there was the nuclear option - some sort of General Anti-Avoidance Rule [GAAR]. Basically if the Government just didn't like the look of your scheme, it was out.
The first method is I think the more democratic and rational but it tends to generate huge volumes of complex legislation and work for tax professionals, often out of all proportion to the sums involved. The second is much cheaper and more effective but tends to leave taxpayers not knowing where they stand and is vulnerable to abuse and arbitrary decisions.
In my day I noticed that as a general rule the poorer and smaller countries tended to favour the second method whilst the older richer nations favored the former. I was always a bit of a GAAR man myself, but then I trusted the Government. Would I trust this one?
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
"It's a day of shame for the Labour Party" "The Labour Party I lead accepts this report in full without equivocation and will implement its recommendations in full"
No, but you can cover it in the Trump or Biden EV totals exchange market, and though it's about 7/1, that gives you coverage of a band of votes also encompassing either a narrow Biden or narrow Trump loss. Which is a pretty good hedge if you have a big position on Biden.
If Tory MPs and lockdown sceptics want to make a difference, they should demand that the Government come clean on the costs of current and future restrictions. They should insist on sound accounting
There are three clauses I’d like to see in public procurement contracts (whether for goods or services) like these:-
1. No contracts to be awarded to companies where any part of the corporate structure is established in a tax haven. Companies should not be benefiting from providing goods/services to the public sector and then be able to avoid paying tax on the profits from such contracts.
As a matter of morality I don't disagree, but the turbulence of the public sector removing all Microsoft products from use will be significant, not only because of Office, but also because of how much runs on Azure, particularly since Amazon WS as the main competitor would also be off the table.
Well, let’s start with companies bidding for new contracts and then think about existing ones.
When I did some work last year for a company (not even the government) I had to confirm that payment would not be made to any company registered outside the U.K. which of course I did.
Making it clear to companies that use of tax havens to minimise the tax paid to the British Treasury on money earned from the British taxpayer will be a very big no-no when they come sniffing for contracts is the least we can expect when money, as we are constantly being told, is tight and businesses here in distress are being told that there is not enough around to help them.
A question of fairness I feel.
The problem will be with any international company. How do you define tax haven, and using it to reduce tax payable on (a) the project in question (b) any other work.
Is moving profits to a lower tax jurisdiction *always* an issue?
I agree with the basic idea - just trying to see how the implementation would work.
A tax haven is any country you use to minimise tax liabilities. Which country you use depends which taxes you are trying to avoid and how. Almost any country can be used as a tax haven and the names that crop up might surprise a lot of people. It's been a while since I practiced but we used to use regularly The Netherlands for dividend-mixing, Germany for group relief manoeuvres [memorably known as Organschaft] and of course the UK interest relief provisions were highly beneficial in a wide range of circumstances.
It was all lawful avoidance of course but indisputably it reduced the tax take of the Exchequers involved which tried to combat it, principally in two ways. First there was the 'sniper' approach. Each tax avoidance wheeze was met by specific legislation outlawing it. Secondly, there was the nuclear option - some sort of General Anti-Avoidance Rule [GAAR]. Basically if the Government just didn't like the look of your scheme, it was out.
The first method is I think the more democratic and rational but it tends to generate huge volumes of complex legislation and work for tax professionals, often out of all proportion to the sums involved. The second is much cheaper and more effective but tends to leave taxpayers not knowing where they stand and is vulnerable to abuse and arbitrary decisions.
In my day I noticed that as a general rule the poorer and smaller countries tended to favour the second method whilst the older richer nations favored the former. I was always a bit of a GAAR man myself, but then I trusted the Government. Would I trust this one?
Hmmmm.........
I used to be dead against GAAR, think it would lead to arbitrary and cosy/corrupt decisions. But I've been won round to it. The sniper approach leads to almost as much arbitrary decision making whilst the GAAR allows a stating of intent in an specific tax law that is easier to understand.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
He won't do it. "A line in the sand, no more missed opportunities". And yet will he get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn?
No
There is no way to 'accept the report in full and without qualification' and to keep Corbyn in the party. Especially when Corbyn is still claiming this is fake news and that he is vindicated.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
He won't do it. "A line in the sand, no more missed opportunities". And yet will he get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn?
No
There is no way to 'accept the report in full and without qualification' and to keep Corbyn in the party. Especially when Corbyn is still claiming this is fake news and that he is vindicated.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
He won't do it. "A line in the sand, no more missed opportunities". And yet will he get Tough on Corbyn and Tough on the Causes of Corbyn?
No
There is no way to 'accept the report in full and without qualification' and to keep Corbyn in the party. Especially when Corbyn is still claiming this is fake news and that he is vindicated.
Perhaps a dumb question, but does that mean it's actually worse in this wave than the first? Belgium was hit pretty bad the first time round, too...
Good question. In the US the numbers I've seen are pretty clear - for the same level of infections there are way fewer ICU admissions and fatalities. I wonder if the same is true in Europe.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
RCP currently has it Biden 311 and Trump 227 with Biden picking up Arizona, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and NE02 and North Carolina and Trump holding his other 2016 states.
However if Trump wins Michigan and Pennsylvania as Trafalgar suggests and North Carolina, where the Biden lead is just 0.7% on average and where the polls also underestimated Trump slightly in 2016, then it would be Trump 278 and Biden 260 and Trump would be narrowly re elected.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
Given that one of the main criticisms of the EHRC report is that the Leader's Office interfered in the complaints process, I wouldn't have thought that it's a good idea for Starmer to ceremoniously expel Corbyn. I haven't read the full report yet, but if it shows that there are grounds for removal of the Whip and/or expulsion from the Party, then due process should be followed.
Golf leans Republican but still this - yet another example of non-shy Trumpery - is disappointing to see. Voting for Donald Trump is one thing, campaigning for him is quite another. Ohio too, which is a battleground state. If Trump holds it by just a few votes I will hold Jack responsible. One must also conclude that his image of deeply moral family man driven by traditional family values is a front for what it so often is with wealthy social conservatives - a visceral dislike of paying taxes. Great player though. That power fade.
Have I missed anything apart from the odd general election, leadership elections, pandemic, POTUS campaign and TSE going over to the dark side of pineapple pizza?
There's been a minor change in our trading relationships with Europe that some are quite exercised about.
Yes I had noticed that David. I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find east European staff to pick pineapples from my hothouses for the new Auchentennach Pizza Extravanganza ....
Have you run out of Liberals to put in your pies? We are getting scarce.
There are shockingly thin on the ground so we have decided to re-brand the product as a niche market high end delight for the gastronomic cognoscenti.
Nice to see you back, Jack. Will you be stopping or are you just out for Halloween?
Perhaps a dumb question, but does that mean it's actually worse in this wave than the first? Belgium was hit pretty bad the first time round, too...
Well, worse in terms of number of people infected, and therefore the number needing hospital treatment. However, while they can all still be treated, the treatments available are better this time, so the overall outcome in terms of deaths should still be better.
Then it depends on how close they are to breaking through their hospital capacity. If that happens then it gets much, much worse, very quickly.
A couple of days ago Mike disclosed that he had backed Biden to be elected the next POTUS at odds with an implied probability of 67.1% on the basis that as he explained "My wager this evening was at 1.49 because it is highly likely that over the next few days is price will tighten and tighten .... " That was on Tuesday, today, Thursday, several bookies are offering odds of 1.55 for the same bet, therefore with an implied probability of 64.5% - still very likely therefore but nonetheless the wrong side of Biden having a two in three chance. Why are the betting markets having doubts on anything like this scale about Joe's prospects of success? I can think of only two possible reasons. Firstly that there is some disbelief in the polls, which wouldn't be too surprising giving the extent to which most succeeded in messing up four years ago. Secondly, as was the case four years ago, there is a significant "Shy Trump" element among the electorate amounting to perhaps 3 - 4 percentage points which, were this were to be the case, would make it a very much closer contest. Supporting this theory are the extraordinarily huge crowds which Trump is continuing to attract, without exception at every address he has delivered over recent days, whilst Biden has remained hunkered down and largely silent. As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
If Corbyn is sacked from the Labour party then I will give Starmer credit.
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
Given that one of the main criticisms of the EHRC report is that the Leader's Office interfered in the complaints process, I wouldn't have thought that it's a good idea for Starmer to ceremoniously expel Corbyn. I haven't read the full report yet, but if it shows that there are grounds for removal of the Whip and/or expulsion from the Party, then due process should be followed.
Starmer has the authority to suspend the whip - or he could at the least answer the questions by saying there will be due process so he can't comment yet if such investigations were going to occur - but instead he chose to literally defend Corbyn. 🤦🏻♂️
I love this podcast so much, especially listen to the first interviewee, Boris. Worth listening to as a lot of our Trump advocacy here tends to be a little bit "QANTAS. QANTAS never crashed".
I am no defender of Corbyn - can't stand him. But I can't help wondering how many, if any, of the commentators on here have read the full 130-page report before leaping to their judgements on what should happen next. Surely it would be a better idea to read it first?
Sounds like a bit of a car crash day for Labour today. Lots less blame of the Gov't seemingly about Covid in the vox pops I've noted - people realise the choices that have to be made now are utterly invidious. The Gov't will fully cop the blame after it's all in the past. But right now everyone is fire fighting on both the health and economic front.
Perhaps a dumb question, but does that mean it's actually worse in this wave than the first? Belgium was hit pretty bad the first time round, too...
Well, worse in terms of number of people infected, and therefore the number needing hospital treatment. However, while they can all still be treated, the treatments available are better this time, so the overall outcome in terms of deaths should still be better.
Then it depends on how close they are to breaking through their hospital capacity. If that happens then it gets much, much worse, very quickly.
The current forecast is that they will hit capacity on November 6th.
The man is institutionally incapable of making a decision on anything is there? But even here he had the hindsight to act and could have with hindsight said that Corbyn's leadership had led to political interference in the complaints so he is suspending the whip from Corbyn pending a disciplinary procedure. But nothing, absolutely nothing. Pathetic.
I'm genuinely saddened by this. Starmer is going to be asked endlessly "what about Jeremy Corbyn" at every opportunity regardless of whatever else he is trying to talk about. The Tories are going to gleefully smash him round the head with his "A New Leadership" slogan. He won't be able to do *anything* because he doesn't feel like he has the political ability to lead his own party.
This isn't about the "no individual findings" excuse. Or worries about legal challenge from the people who should be expelled. "Bringing the party into disrepute" is all he needs. And the rule of the General Secretary is absolute.
So he absolutely could have expelled Corbyn and the rest. He chose not to. And in doing so has just sunk his leadership. Never mind who will replace Shagger as PM, who will Sunak face in the 2024 election? What's the odds on the King in the North getting back into parliament and taking over the leadership...?
As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
Question: Why do you think that when media attention focuses on Trump this benefits him electorally? I'd argue that for the whole year Trump has done worse when he's been in the headlines and he's rightly, and unsuccessfully, tried to draw attention to Biden as a result.
Comments
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
My, some mad ones out there...
https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbynMP/posts/10158939532253872
I'd like fraudsters prosecuted but having experience in business I can assure you that your claims that clauses should not bother competent companies is absolutely fatuous - it is an undeniable absolute truth that cashflow is the lifeblood of business. You screw with cashflow and you kill even healthy businesses.
If you're so keen on screwing around with cashflow for these businesses pause for one second please and ask yourself if you'd be happy to see the same principles followed with your daughters? If she was ramping up sales 50x as these PPE businesses are then would she be OK to pay her own suppliers up front 50x more cash while having her payments from her customers tied up for months? Could she cope with a surge of cashflow out and no cashflow in for months?
Cashflow is the lifeblood of healthy businesses not just fraudsters Cyclefree.
https://twitter.com/Conflicts/status/1321767903449014272?s=20
https://twitter.com/springsteen/status/1321507795150106624?s=20
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics/2020-us-presidential-election/10393583/electoral-college-vote-tie-special/924.237362868
But on Tuesday alone, one in every 1,000 residents of North and South Dakota was diagnosed with COVID-19. That’s a per-capita rate of infection nearly double New York State’s during the spring.
Unless there have been any advances in treatment in the early stages - while the patient is still at home. I haven't heard of any... calling the medics?
My ARSE is in retirement and is presently enjoying life in New Zealand where its' advice on keeping the nations buttocks and borders firmly closed has proved fruitful.
As to the POTUS election I have been following the proceedings closely and have until election night closed all my positions to excellent advantage and thus facilitate a major shopping spree for Mrs Jack W in numerous retail fleshpots. Accordingly I am in good favour with the Great She Elephant of Chez Auchentennach.
Here are 5 takeaways from the race that have peaked my antennae over the past few days :
1. Outwith the national and state polls the House races are a mine of telling information. Consistent swings to to Dems in the 6-8% range. So goes the House etc ?!?
2. It appears that the fabled 18-30 yr turnout has happened this election - Approx 3-1 in Dem favour.
3. "I've got Georgia on my mind" ... Trending blue more quickly than I thought and the numbers from the Peach State are astonishing. If Georgia goes for Biden then it provides another path to 270 for Biden.
4. Trump went to NE02. Why if its in the bag for just one EC vote?
5. Bloomberg pouring money into Texas and Ohio for Biden and Trump pulling cash from Florida. Trump doesn't need Florida if he can thread the needle again in PA WI and MI and hold the 2016 map. But then Arizona.
It was all lawful avoidance of course but indisputably it reduced the tax take of the Exchequers involved which tried to combat it, principally in two ways. First there was the 'sniper' approach. Each tax avoidance wheeze was met by specific legislation outlawing it. Secondly, there was the nuclear option - some sort of General Anti-Avoidance Rule [GAAR]. Basically if the Government just didn't like the look of your scheme, it was out.
The first method is I think the more democratic and rational but it tends to generate huge volumes of complex legislation and work for tax professionals, often out of all proportion to the sums involved. The second is much cheaper and more effective but tends to leave taxpayers not knowing where they stand and is vulnerable to abuse and arbitrary decisions.
In my day I noticed that as a general rule the poorer and smaller countries tended to favour the second method whilst the older richer nations favored the former. I was always a bit of a GAAR man myself, but then I trusted the Government. Would I trust this one?
Hmmmm.........
Political interference from the leaders office
If he doesn't he is a moral pygmy. All mouth and no trousers.
https://sports.ladbrokes.com/event/politics/international/us-elections/next-us-presidential-election/224912471/all-markets
"The Labour Party I lead accepts this report in full without equivocation and will implement its recommendations in full"
SKS
Which is a pretty good hedge if you have a big position on Biden.
No
Corbyn, Milne, Karie Murphy et al should be booted, but won't be.
Not a good look
I rarely agree with @Philip_Thompson on political matters, but he is correct about this issue.
Each journalist asking about Corbyn and he looks evasive and weak
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
However if Trump wins Michigan and Pennsylvania as Trafalgar suggests and North Carolina, where the Biden lead is just 0.7% on average and where the polls also underestimated Trump slightly in 2016, then it would be Trump 278 and Biden 260 and Trump would be narrowly re elected.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/2020_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html
This is not going away anytime soon
Starmer seems institutionally incapable of making any decisions on anything. Weak, weak, weak.
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1321774068455088128?s=20
Once their minds are made up that it MUST all not be a problem, they're unshakeable.
This is worse than Sami Chakrabarti whitewash
Then it depends on how close they are to breaking through their hospital capacity. If that happens then it gets much, much worse, very quickly.
That was on Tuesday, today, Thursday, several bookies are offering odds of 1.55 for the same bet, therefore with an implied probability of 64.5% - still very likely therefore but nonetheless the wrong side of Biden having a two in three chance.
Why are the betting markets having doubts on anything like this scale about Joe's prospects of success? I can think of only two possible reasons. Firstly that there is some disbelief in the polls, which wouldn't be too surprising giving the extent to which most succeeded in messing up four years ago.
Secondly, as was the case four years ago, there is a significant "Shy Trump" element among the electorate amounting to perhaps 3 - 4 percentage points which, were this were to be the case, would make it a very much closer contest. Supporting this theory are the extraordinarily huge crowds which Trump is continuing to attract, without exception at every address he has delivered over recent days, whilst Biden has remained hunkered down and largely silent.
As is constantly being stated here and elsewhere, the majority of votes have already been cast but, and it's a very large but, if the contest is indeed close, Trump's exhausting programme of speech-making over the final few days and the media attention this will inevitably attract might just prove decisive.
https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1321775191983349766
He could have drawn a line in the sand, instead he's digging in.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-maga-special-trump-bettors-speak/id1437934639?i=1000496445968
https://twitter.com/BrusselsTimes/status/1321506396580491264
The man is institutionally incapable of making a decision on anything is there? But even here he had the hindsight to act and could have with hindsight said that Corbyn's leadership had led to political interference in the complaints so he is suspending the whip from Corbyn pending a disciplinary procedure. But nothing, absolutely nothing. Pathetic.
This isn't about the "no individual findings" excuse. Or worries about legal challenge from the people who should be expelled. "Bringing the party into disrepute" is all he needs. And the rule of the General Secretary is absolute.
So he absolutely could have expelled Corbyn and the rest. He chose not to. And in doing so has just sunk his leadership. Never mind who will replace Shagger as PM, who will Sunak face in the 2024 election? What's the odds on the King in the North getting back into parliament and taking over the leadership...?