politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » David Herdson wonders how much we can trust the referendum

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

@DavidL

UK government debt-to-GDP will probably peak in 3Q next year. From that point on, while our debt pile will continue to grow, it will be diminishing in size relative to the economy.

That is the hope but it is based upon assumptions that the deficit is going to fall a lot faster than it has over the last several years. Last year the deficit fell a couple of billion off 120bn and many screamed about the cuts. This year it is supposed to fall more like 20bn but it is behind target at the moment.

As you know debt will continue to rise until the deficit is a smaller percentage of the GDP than the growth. I fear that particular crossover is going to be further delayed.

The biggest component is the increase in nominal GDP: if we assume 3% economic growth and 1.5% inflation in 2015 (not unreasonable assumptions), then we get to 'deflate' the debt by 4.5% before looking at the deficit.

So - 91.1% (Mar 2014) becomes 87.0% before deficit. Now, if the OECD is right, and the UK runs a 4.1% deficit next year, then we get debt-to-GDP remaining a fabulously constant 91.1% - with the peak probably being in 3Q.

The only way those numbers are likely to add up is if we get more inflation which, given the situation in the EZ, is currently looking unlikely. Our deficit will be higher and our growth is dependent on developments elsewhere outwith our control. Growth is simply not producing the additional revenue expected. Or to put it another way, as Flightpath has touched upon, our deficit is a lot more structural than cyclical.

Cruel summer,

Indeed. If the polls are correct people believe the solution to our problems is more unrestricted third world immigration, plus more spending and debt, and more multi culturalism and diversity.

Its one way to go...

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

under the electoral system used the choice of the people ( more people than for others ) was for an SNP government.

That's not true either. More "people" wanted something else.

They got the SNP

Don't talk crap , under the electoral system they were the choice of the people to form a government.

You are the one talking 'crap' and it ill behoves you criticising others.
The simple fact is the SNP got a majority in their so called 'parliament' (in effect a devolved regional assembly with limited powers) - that's fair enough and as such they can vote in their parliament to demand an independence referendum. This has been generously granted.
However they did not get a majority of votes cast and they did not get a majority of available votes.

Pulpstar said:

taffys said:

Cameron is having a desperate, desperate summer.

He appears oblivious.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ePIZugahFc

Cool 80s Classic!

OldKingCole said:

Flightpath said:

OldKingCole said:

Financier said:

malcolmg said:

Patrick said:

Smarmeron said:

@Patrick
Build gas chambers for the poor?
Or finally do some basic maths, and realise that Capitalism in it's present form is insane?
(Note the "present form" before you all have kittens at the thought of a communist takeover)

Not really. Business can find savings and drive efficiency. So should the state. In the scale of our economy finding another 100 billion is not an unachievable task. In fact the current government's projections and OBR assume we will get to balanced books sooner or later.

The state is just too big. If we made all schools voucher funded competitive private entities we'd get a better outcome and it would cost alot less. If we made the NHS free at the point of use but created a very diversified competitive market for delivery then health outcomes would improve and it'd cost alot less. Benefit reforms are working. Cut overseas aid. Cut public sector fat cat pay. Put the public sector on private sector lookalike pension structures. Put retirement ages up in line with life expectancies and improving medical outcomes. Cut the BBC funding. etc etc. The world wouldn't fall apart - even for the poor (in fact there'd be alot less of them). It will fall apart if we don't deal with the problem.

Get the poor up those chimneys, make them useful.

You are frivolous with a very serious matter. The UK has thousands of people who are uneducated and often unemployable - how would you propose to get them back to work, as technology has eliminated many of the unskilled jobs?

I don’t often agree with Financier but here he is on the right track. We do have a problem with education. It’s apparently been taken for granted for years that there will be a difficult to educate “lumpenproletariat” and that there will be simple, probably manual, jobs for them to do. Many of those jobs are either not going to be there in future, and as a society we’ve got to encourage those who “haven’t done well at school” to do what many of us now do normally..... contune their education right through life.

No one in their right minds will employ the Wayne and Waynettas of this world. Or da gangsta rappers inda 'hood.
I doubt anyone will employ any of their children. How do you break the circle or do we put up with this underclass?

I recommend, Mr Flightpath, that you do some genealogical research. You may well find that not all your forebears were the sort of fine upstanding chap that you undoubtedly are!

My forebears were mostly coal miners. All our forebears had to develop some sort of work ethic since there was no welfare system.

foxinsoxuk said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Really Harry? REALLY?

"It shouldn't finish his life should it? He's a young man with a big future, no-one's suffered like he and his family.

http://uk.soccerway.com/news/2014/August/22/redknapp-mackay-should-get-second-chance/n399353/

Malky Mackay texts: Harry Redknapp defends former Cardiff City manger - 'he hasn't raped anyone and he is not a paedophile'

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/redknapp-defends-mackay--he-hasnt-raped-anyone-and-he-is-not-a-paedophile-9685399.html

You're the one who doesn't think criminals should be locked up, so why shouldn't people who make ill judged comments be given a second chance too?

That's a broad and inaccurate generalisation of my views on sentencing.

My point was in the week a chap has been beheaded, to say Mackay and his family and have suffered like no-one else, is crass at best.

If we are going to reference everything to James Foleys murder then everything is good and nothing is bad. I can't imagine the whole of the weekends football is going to be viewed through that prism

The reasons why we have got to the point where a British man from East London is beheading an American in the name of the Islamic state while the Isis flag flies in Poplar are not really being discussed on here anyway

To eradicate malaria, we do not just kill mosquitos, we need to drain the swamp.

We need to address the reasons why muslim youths are attracted to Jihadi groups, and how we permit these views to be spread.

In neither answer do we need to leave the EU. Indeed many of our EU partners are addressing the same issues.

We need to fight an idelogical war and win the battle of ideas, something we have been very bad at doing, partly because we have refused to accept that there is an ideological battle going on and partly because we have not wanted to go near the issue of how far Islam - or a particular interpretation of it - is partly responsible and, incidentally, in so doing we have abandoned those liberal/reforming Muslim voices out there, to our discredit, and partly because of a lack of self-belief in our own Western culture, civilization and values.

Just as bad money drives out good, bad ideas drive out good ones. We need to turn that around. We won't achieve any of this if the issue is seen only as a security issue (external or internal) or as one of preventing terrorist acts. We need to make it clear that the sorts of ideas which lie behind IS and similar groups are utterly hateful and wholly unacceptable in Western society. We must stop tolerating the utterly intolerable.

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

@DavidL

UK government debt-to-GDP will probably peak in 3Q next year. From that point on, while our debt pile will continue to grow, it will be diminishing in size relative to the economy.

That is the hope but it is based upon assumptions that the deficit is going to fall a lot faster than it has over the last several years. Last year the deficit fell a couple of billion off 120bn and many screamed about the cuts. This year it is supposed to fall more like 20bn but it is behind target at the moment.

As you know debt will continue to rise until the deficit is a smaller percentage of the GDP than the growth. I fear that particular crossover is going to be further delayed.

The biggest component is the increase in nominal GDP: if we assume 3% economic growth and 1.5% inflation in 2015 (not unreasonable assumptions), then we get to 'deflate' the debt by 4.5% before looking at the deficit.

So - 91.1% (Mar 2014) becomes 87.0% before deficit. Now, if the OECD is right, and the UK runs a 4.1% deficit next year, then we get debt-to-GDP remaining a fabulously constant 91.1% - with the peak probably being in 3Q.

The only way those numbers are likely to add up is if we get more inflation which, given the situation in the EZ, is currently looking unlikely. Our deficit will be higher and our growth is dependent on developments elsewhere outwith our control. Growth is simply not producing the additional revenue expected. Or to put it another way, as Flightpath has touched upon, our deficit is a lot more structural than cyclical.

While you are right that there is still a chunk of structural deficit in there, we're actually doing pretty well. This has not been a V shaped recovery, more a U shaped on, and we are still well below trend output levels. It is quite possible that there are another four or five years of economic expansion ahead of us this cycle. I would also point out that the current inflation rate is 1.6%, so my 1.5% forecast for next year doesn't look ridiculous.

Assuming Ukraine doesn't deteriorate further, then you're probably too pessimistic on the Eurozone. Although 2Q GDP numbers were weak, the PMIs from Markit continue to show an improving economy. And Adecco and Ransdstat (the world's two largest staffing agencies) are seeing very strong staff demand in Spain, Portugal, Italy, and Germany - something dramatically at odds with 2Q GDP data. (France is, of course, the sick man, with weak PMIs and staffing data.)

Dudley

Lab 10,846
Con 9,724
UKIP 5,569
LD 925

foxinsoxuk said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Really Harry? REALLY?

"It shouldn't finish his life should it? He's a young man with a big future, no-one's suffered like he and his family.

http://uk.soccerway.com/news/2014/August/22/redknapp-mackay-should-get-second-chance/n399353/

Malky Mackay texts: Harry Redknapp defends former Cardiff City manger - 'he hasn't raped anyone and he is not a paedophile'

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/redknapp-defends-mackay--he-hasnt-raped-anyone-and-he-is-not-a-paedophile-9685399.html

You're the one who doesn't think criminals should be locked up, so why shouldn't people who make ill judged comments be given a second chance too?

That's a broad and inaccurate generalisation of my views on sentencing.

My point was in the week a chap has been beheaded, to say Mackay and his family and have suffered like no-one else, is crass at best.

If we are going to reference everything to James Foleys murder then everything is good and nothing is bad. I can't imagine the whole of the weekends football is going to be viewed through that prism

The reasons why we have got to the point where a British man from East London is beheading an American in the name of the Islamic state while the Isis flag flies in Poplar are not really being discussed on here anyway

To eradicate malaria, we do not just kill mosquitos, we need to drain the swamp.

We need to address the reasons why muslim youths are attracted to Jihadi groups, and how we permit these views to be spread.

In neither answer do we need to leave the EU. Indeed many of our EU partners are addressing the same issues.

Problem is, Dr Fox, if we “just” drain the swamp we mess up all the other animals and plants that live there.

AndreaParma_82 said:

Lab candidate was a Cllr in Solihull until may 2014 (he has been an MP for Plymouth too) and Con candidate is a Cllr in Dudley.

So Labour’s doing a bit better than last time on a similar, if slightly lower, turnout?

Labour David Jamieson should have become West Midlands PCC with 50.something% on first preferences

OldKingCole said:

I think many people in jobs of that type would report similar experiences; I’m sure Dr Fox has met admin people who make similar statements. or demonstrate a similar attitude.

Having said that I was, a couple of years ago at a talk where a senior Fire Officer (firefighter) explained that a major part of their job nowadays was prevention. He asserted that it was possible, from a knowledge of the demographics (including who among the elderly population was using a particular sort of leg ulcer dressing) to identify risk and that doing this work had not only become his major duty, but was resulting in a decrease in the “fire and rescue” work.

Whether that is true or not I’m not qualified to judge and I’d be interested in advice on the matter.

For sure, Mr. Cole and the efforts the Fire and Rescue Service are putting into prevention must be applauded. It is after all far better to prevent a fire than to have to put one out. However, at the end of the day fires do happen and people do get trapped. That is what the service is there to deal with. The prevention stuff can be done by anyone, the council, age concern, just about anyone. Putting out fires and rescuing people can only be done by properly trained, properly equipped people who are available in sufficient numbers in sufficient time. That is what the Fire and Rescue Services primary job must be.

Mr. Stopper's point below about not having enough people on site to do the job with a sufficient degree of safety (and God knows the fire-fighters job is dangerous enough as it is) menas that people will die when they didn't have to. In fact they will die because of the attitude that has meant admin people have taken over and made admin more important that the delivery of the service the organisation exists for.

In his book, "The Law" C. Northcote Parkinson says that any company that builds a swanky new headquarters has forgotten what it is there for and will collapse. Mr. Stopper told us a year or so back that his Brigade had just built a swanky new HQ.

Jamieson (Lab) 102,561 (50.8%)
Jones (C) 54,091 (26.8%)
Rowe (UKIP) 32,187 (16.0%)
Khan (L Dem) 12,950 (6.4%)

compared to 2012

Lab +8.8
Con +8.29
UKIP +8.63
LD unchanged

Cyclefree said:

We need to make it clear that the sorts of ideas which lie behind IS and similar groups are utterly hateful and wholly unacceptable in Western society. We must stop tolerating the utterly intolerable.

The result of this strategy, which has already been adopted in part, is that we are sending young Muslim men to prison for terms in excess of a decade, for what are in effect no more than thought crimes. An ideology, no matter how virulent, must be tolerated save insofar as it incites violence or lawlessness. Islamism can only be defeated as an ideology, if we stop locking people up for holding the wrong views, and start engaging in debate with them.

We must stop tolerating the utterly intolerable.

Be honest. Do any of our leaders show even the first inklings of doing this?

Look at their reactions to what is happening. They have nothing to offer. They just hope this will go away. They would rather talk about anything else.

For me, this week's events, and in particular the crimes being avidly committed by British born and raised citizens, are like a punch to the guts.

HurstLlama said:

OldKingCole said:

I think many people in jobs of that type would report similar experiences; I’m sure Dr Fox has met admin people who make similar statements. or demonstrate a similar attitude.

Having said that I was, a couple of years ago at a talk where a senior Fire Officer (firefighter) explained that a major part of their job nowadays was prevention. He asserted that it was possible, from a knowledge of the demographics (including who among the elderly population was using a particular sort of leg ulcer dressing) to identify risk and that doing this work had not only become his major duty, but was resulting in a decrease in the “fire and rescue” work.

Whether that is true or not I’m not qualified to judge and I’d be interested in advice on the matter.

For sure, Mr. Cole and the efforts the Fire and Rescue Service are putting into prevention must be applauded. It is after all far better to prevent a fire than to have to put one out. However, at the end of the day fires do happen and people do get trapped. That is what the service is there to deal with. The prevention stuff can be done by anyone, the council, age concern, just about anyone. Putting out fires and rescuing people can only be done by properly trained, properly equipped people who are available in sufficient numbers in sufficient time. That is what the Fire and Rescue Services primary job must be.

Mr. Stopper's point below about not having enough people on site to do the job with a sufficient degree of safety (and God knows the fire-fighters job is dangerous enough as it is) menas that people will die when they didn't have to. In fact they will die because of the attitude that has meant admin people have taken over and made admin more important that the delivery of the service the organisation exists for.

In his book, "The Law" C. Northcote Parkinson says that any company that builds a swanky new headquarters has forgotten what it is there for and will collapse. Mr. Stopper told us a year or so back that his Brigade had just built a swanky new HQ.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-22179083

http://www.pickeverard.co.uk/news/2012/new-8m-HQ-for-Leicestershire-Fire-Rescue-Service.html

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/New-pound-11m-modern-iconic-HQ-unveiled/story-18731688-detail/story.html

HurstLlama said:

OldKingCole said:

I think many people in jobs of that type would report similar experiences; I’m sure Dr Fox has met admin people who make similar statements. or demonstrate a similar attitude.

Having said that I was, a couple of years ago at a talk where a senior Fire Officer (firefighter) explained that a major part of their job nowadays was prevention. He asserted that it was possible, from a knowledge of the demographics (including who among the elderly population was using a particular sort of leg ulcer dressing) to identify risk and that doing this work had not only become his major duty, but was resulting in a decrease in the “fire and rescue” work.

Whether that is true or not I’m not qualified to judge and I’d be interested in advice on the matter.

In fact they will die because of the attitude that has meant admin people have taken over and made admin more important that the delivery of the service the organisation exists for.

Look at the MoD, where civil servants massively outnumber the fighting men and women. No doubt for them providing a proper health and safety assessment of the new design of female Petty Officer uniforms is more important than - erm - having aircraft on an aircraft carrier.

I was being a bit grumpy earlier about public sector waste. Much of this is back office / administrative. It's not the front line that needs to be cut. We've lost what 1 million, 2 million civil servants since 2010? Who apart from the civil servants themselves has noticed? WTF were they doing before? How many more are there? I bet a disciplined CEO could find 15,000 jobs at the MoD and still improve the nation's fighting capabilities.

OldKingCole said:

Flightpath said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

under the electoral system used the choice of the people ( more people than for others ) was for an SNP government.

That's not true either. More "people" wanted something else.

They got the SNP

Don't talk crap , under the electoral system they were the choice of the people to form a government.

You are the one talking 'crap' and it ill behoves you criticising others.
The simple fact is the SNP got a majority in their so called 'parliament' (in effect a devolved regional assembly with limited powers) - that's fair enough and as such they can vote in their parliament to demand an independence referendum. This has been generously granted.
However they did not get a majority of votes cast and they did not get a majority of available votes.

I rarely agree with Mr Flightpath, but on this occasion he’s correct.

Another fanny avoiding the truth and the point by trying to play on words.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Neil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The discourse on here gets more Socratic by the day.

We havent discussed how terrible muslims are in ages!

Or do you mean something else by that?

I really am worried about Muslims here.

I heard something on the news last night, that most British Jihadis, earlier in their life, were bad Muslims, who engaged in bad things like fornication, drinking and other un-Islamic things, saw the error of their ways and repented, and thus became Jihadis,

Am I a future Jihadi?

Extremely good letter in the Times yday from some one I assume was Muslim, from some foundation or other, doing what many people say "muslims" never do - ie wholly repudiating Islamist extremist ideology and actions.

taffys said:

We must stop tolerating the utterly intolerable.

Be honest. Do any of our leaders show even the first inklings of doing this?

Look at their reactions to what is happening. They have nothing to offer. They just hope this will go away. They would rather talk about anything else.

For me, this week's events, and in particular the crimes being avidly committed by British born and raised citizens, are like a punch to the guts.

Farage said strip them of British nationality.... Some Tories on here said it was a silly idea, others agreed... Labour people just don't say anything

AndreaParma_82 said:

Jamieson (Lab) 102,561 (50.8%)
Jones (C) 54,091 (26.8%)
Rowe (UKIP) 32,187 (16.0%)
Khan (L Dem) 12,950 (6.4%)

compared to 2012

Lab +8.8
Con +8.29
UKIP +8.63
LD unchanged

Seems a reasonable result all round, but three indies last time and the low turnout make it hard to deduce anything.

Nice Populus though! It's noticeable that the flurry of Cameron interviews this week doesn't seem to have helped - arguably people have got beyond the stage when they switch votes merely because a party leader says something they vaguely agree with ("yeah, some pop videos are dodgy"), unless he actually does anything about it.

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Neil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The discourse on here gets more Socratic by the day.

We havent discussed how terrible muslims are in ages!

Or do you mean something else by that?

I really am worried about Muslims here.

I heard something on the news last night, that most British Jihadis, earlier in their life, were bad Muslims, who engaged in bad things like fornication, drinking and other un-Islamic things, saw the error of their ways and repented, and thus became Jihadis,

Am I a future Jihadi?

Extremely good letter in the Times yday from some one I assume was Muslim, from some foundation or other, doing what many people say "muslims" never do - ie wholly repudiating Islamist extremist ideology and actions.

Don't worry - they'll still keep saying 'they never do it'

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Neil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The discourse on here gets more Socratic by the day.

We havent discussed how terrible muslims are in ages!

Or do you mean something else by that?

I really am worried about Muslims here.

I heard something on the news last night, that most British Jihadis, earlier in their life, were bad Muslims, who engaged in bad things like fornication, drinking and other un-Islamic things, saw the error of their ways and repented, and thus became Jihadis,

Am I a future Jihadi?

Extremely good letter in the Times yday from some one I assume was Muslim, from some foundation or other, doing what many people say "muslims" never do - ie wholly repudiating Islamist extremist ideology and actions.

Yes - and we need to give space and prominence to such people. Instead of which the government appointed T Ramadam to some internal working group - and if you look carefully at him and his sayings - you will see that he is part of the problem not the solution. There is still a mentality (exemplified by the Home Office) of engaging with people whose views are hateful - on the grounds that they are "moderates" - though they aren't, on the basis (again wrong) that they somehow speak for "their" community and can rein in the hotheads. Wrong on every count and a very patronising and colonialist view.

Cyclefree said:

I fundamentally disagree. We do not tolerate those holding Nazi views or debate with them. We shunned the BNP and the National Front and made it unacceptable to hold those views and to be associated with such people. We need to do the same with those holding similar views but justifying them under the banner of Islam. It's not a question (necessarily) of locking people up but of being much more active in countering such views and much less laid back about allowing the UK to become the breeding ground for such views.

It is a matter of fact that we do tolerate the British National Party. It is lawful, and is permitted to stand at elections, and, shamefully, has even, on occasion, had candidates elected. Likewise, other totalitarian political parties such as Marxist-Leninist and Maoist Communist sects are tolerated. That is not to say that they are approved of, but they are certainly tolerated. It is also a matter of fact that, in the case of Islamism alone, we are sending people to prison on the basis of their political motives.

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Neil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The discourse on here gets more Socratic by the day.

We havent discussed how terrible muslims are in ages!

Or do you mean something else by that?

I really am worried about Muslims here.

I heard something on the news last night, that most British Jihadis, earlier in their life, were bad Muslims, who engaged in bad things like fornication, drinking and other un-Islamic things, saw the error of their ways and repented, and thus became Jihadis,

Am I a future Jihadi?

Extremely good letter in the Times yday from some one I assume was Muslim, from some foundation or other, doing what many people say "muslims" never do - ie wholly repudiating Islamist extremist ideology and actions.

Some prefer to joke about it

HurstLlama said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

HurstLlama said:

OldKingCole said:

I think many people in jobs of that type would report similar experiences; I’m sure Dr Fox has met admin people who make similar statements. or demonstrate a similar attitude.

Having said that I was, a couple of years ago at a talk where a senior Fire Officer (firefighter) explained that a major part of their job nowadays was prevention. He asserted that it was possible, from a knowledge of the demographics (including who among the elderly population was using a particular sort of leg ulcer dressing) to identify risk and that doing this work had not only become his major duty, but was resulting in a decrease in the “fire and rescue” work.

Whether that is true or not I’m not qualified to judge and I’d be interested in advice on the matter.

....

In his book, "The Law" C. Northcote Parkinson says that any company that builds a swanky new headquarters has forgotten what it is there for and will collapse. Mr. Stopper told us a year or so back that his Brigade had just built a swanky new HQ.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-22179083

http://www.pickeverard.co.uk/news/2012/new-8m-HQ-for-Leicestershire-Fire-Rescue-Service.html

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/New-pound-11m-modern-iconic-HQ-unveiled/story-18731688-detail/story.html

Interesting that the story from 2012 said the price of the new HQ would be £8m but the stories from 2013 said that the cost was actually £11m. That is quite some cost overrun on a very straightforward project.

That Parkinson bloke was a very clever fellow.

If you look at the comments one points out that a couple of weeks previously the paper was quoting £7 million. (!) It may well be that journalists do not know what they are talking about, but like me I'm sure you will find that hard to believe.

TOPPING said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Neil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

The discourse on here gets more Socratic by the day.

We havent discussed how terrible muslims are in ages!

Or do you mean something else by that?

I really am worried about Muslims here.

I heard something on the news last night, that most British Jihadis, earlier in their life, were bad Muslims, who engaged in bad things like fornication, drinking and other un-Islamic things, saw the error of their ways and repented, and thus became Jihadis,

Am I a future Jihadi?

Extremely good letter in the Times yday from some one I assume was Muslim, from some foundation or other, doing what many people say "muslims" never do - ie wholly repudiating Islamist extremist ideology and actions.

Yes, the Quilliam Foundation have been very active over the last few years. One of the their spokesmen, Maajid Nawaz is standing for parliament in 2015. Unfortunately, as an LD in Hampstead and Kilburn, so he's unlikely to get elected.

OldKingCole said:

Flightpath said:

malcolmg said:

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

under the electoral system used the choice of the people ( more people than for others ) was for an SNP government.

That's not true either. More "people" wanted something else.

They got the SNP

Don't talk crap , under the electoral system they were the choice of the people to form a government.

You are the one talking 'crap' and it ill behoves you criticising others.
The simple fact is the SNP got a majority in their so called 'parliament' (in effect a devolved regional assembly with limited powers) - that's fair enough and as such they can vote in their parliament to demand an independence referendum. This has been generously granted.
However they did not get a majority of votes cast and they did not get a majority of available votes.

I rarely agree with Mr Flightpath, but on this occasion he’s correct.

And I so want to be loved...

OldKingCole said:

foxinsoxuk said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Really Harry? REALLY?

"It shouldn't finish his life should it? He's a young man with a big future, no-one's suffered like he and his family.

http://uk.soccerway.com/news/2014/August/22/redknapp-mackay-should-get-second-chance/n399353/

Malky Mackay texts: Harry Redknapp defends former Cardiff City manger - 'he hasn't raped anyone and he is not a paedophile'

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/redknapp-defends-mackay--he-hasnt-raped-anyone-and-he-is-not-a-paedophile-9685399.html

You're the one who doesn't think criminals should be locked up, so why shouldn't people who make ill judged comments be given a second chance too?

That's a broad and inaccurate generalisation of my views on sentencing.

My point was in the week a chap has been beheaded, to say Mackay and his family and have suffered like no-one else, is crass at best.

If we are going to reference everything to James Foleys murder then everything is good and nothing is bad. I can't imagine the whole of the weekends football is going to be viewed through that prism

The reasons why we have got to the point where a British man from East London is beheading an American in the name of the Islamic state while the Isis flag flies in Poplar are not really being discussed on here anyway

To eradicate malaria, we do not just kill mosquitos, we need to drain the swamp.

We need to address the reasons why muslim youths are attracted to Jihadi groups, and how we permit these views to be spread.

In neither answer do we need to leave the EU. Indeed many of our EU partners are addressing the same issues.

Problem is, Dr Fox, if we “just” drain the swamp we mess up all the other animals and plants that live there.

It's the habitat of many endangered species,insects and reptiles that need protecting.

Cyclefree said:

It may be legal but it - and the people in it - are largely shunned. And that is why it - and those Marxist sects you mention - have made so little headway, thank God.

We need to do the same in the case of Islamism. We are not - or not to the extent needed - and we need to, urgently.

It seems Islamism is fairly effectively shunned. No one running on an openly Islamist platform has any serious political influence.

Patrick said:

DavidL said:

rcs1000 said:

@DavidL

UK government debt-to-GDP will probably peak in 3Q next year. From that point on, while our debt pile will continue to grow, it will be diminishing in size relative to the economy.

As you know debt will continue to rise until the deficit is a smaller percentage of the GDP than the growth. I fear that particular crossover is going to be further delayed.

This is of course true. As long as GDP grows forever. In the real world where we get recessions every decade or so it means debt/GDP creeps down for a while and then skyrockets and then creeps down for a while and then skyrockets again. The cumulative effect over decades is a very steady up trend. We need to eleiminate deficits.

Every 7-9 years. Debt to GDP levels are too elevated to cope next time.

taffys said:

Look at the MoD, where civil servants massively outnumber the fighting men and women.

I wonder if we could start to give some minor responsibility for procurement to the fighting soldiers themselves. They are the experts. They know what kit works and what doesn't, what's needed and what isn't.

The British Army is much bigger than the MOD Civil Service. Taken together the services dwarf it. Of the 50-60k civil servants, the vast majority are industrial grades (e.g. fixing vehicles) or the likes of intelligence professionals.

Defence Procurement is done by project teams in Bristol with a heavy military presence, including senior NCOs with recent 'hands on' experience. Procurement Strategy is led by the services (or in the recent past by military heavy teams in the MOD). All of this is public domain info and available to anyone capable of using Google, and who doesn't base their opinions on what the press tells them.

Life_ina_market_town said:

Cyclefree said:

It may be legal but it - and the people in it - are largely shunned. And that is why it - and those Marxist sects you mention - have made so little headway, thank God.

We need to do the same in the case of Islamism. We are not - or not to the extent needed - and we need to, urgently.

It seems Islamism is fairly effectively shunned. No one running on an openly Islamist platform has any serious political influence.

George Galloway winning Bradford west is a warning to the big 3 parties that a Islamist party with Good leader,social issues could easily start winning seats,where I live is a prime example.

malcolmg said:

Party Constituency List
SNP 902915 876421
Lab 630461 523559
Tory 276652 245967
LibDem 157714 103472

How many people did NOT get the government they voted for?

Is that number bigger or smaller than the SNP vote?

Clue, things that are far away may look smaller, even though they are not

Patrick said:

The big problem with cutting the civil service by applying private sector type efficiency drives to it is that those responsible for making it happen are themselves civil servants. The Sir Humphrey resistance to change is visceral and deep rooted. An iron political will to enforce is needed - but that then erodes government/civil service relationships. And for a Labour government with strong public sector union funding it's pretty much undoable.

In my previous role I was accountable for running the monthly/quarterly financial closing and reporting activity of my employer (a multinational). About 1,000 staff involved worldwide. I was based in Manila. The UK government could centralise finance, HR, IT, office services, legal support, contracting and procurement, etc, etc, Put the service centres somewhere less expensive than London (not Manila but, say, Newcastle!) . And stop doing this is in an unco-ordinated and fragmented way across departments.

Hey Dave (or Francis Maude) put me in charge. Really. OGH host knows who I am. Give me free rein to manage and I'll save you at least a billion quid a year in admin costs.

(The civil service would have a cow).

You reminded me that the DVLA is in Swansea, not London.
So it can be done, the problem is that with the capital being in London you expect that government departments and the associated civil service will be located in London.
I can't imagine the treasury being relocated to Newcastle.

Tykejohnno said:

Mohammed Amin @Mohammed_Amin

Rare for me to agree with UKIP leader Nigel Farage. Britons fighting for #ISIS should be stripped of citizenship. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-leader-nigel-farage-calls-for-britons-joining-the-islamic-state-abroad-to-be-stripped-of-british-citizenship-9681946.html …

...and just look at the comments section! Typical UKIPgraph etc etc etc... oh its the Independent?!

Wheres the angle to disagree with UKIP here? Indy bias?

Tykejohnno said:

Life_ina_market_town said:

Cyclefree said:

It may be legal but it - and the people in it - are largely shunned. And that is why it - and those Marxist sects you mention - have made so little headway, thank God.

We need to do the same in the case of Islamism. We are not - or not to the extent needed - and we need to, urgently.

It seems Islamism is fairly effectively shunned. No one running on an openly Islamist platform has any serious political influence.

George Galloway winning Bradford west is a warning to the big 3 parties that a Islamist party with Good leader,social issues could easily start winning seats,where I live is a prime example.

That is true, they could easily get 30 seats, mostly hitting Labour in the inner cities, however that will cost them in power as the main parties (Labour especially) will be quite short of muslim mp's to get government posts (like Sadiq Khan) and it will give a free hand to the government to really confront them.

Richard_Nabavi said:

peter_from_putney said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

@PopulusPolls: Latest Populus VI: Lab 39 (+2), Con 33 (+1), LD 9 (=), UKIP 11 (-3), Oth 8 (=). Tables here: http://t.co/vrnZvVUPm7

Yes, this is a very good poll indeed for Labour - adding credibility to the two most recent YouGov/Sun daily polls and achieved somewhat surprisingly against the background of falling UKIP support, which according to conventional wisdom should primarily benefit the Tories.
Incidentally UKIP's 11% must be their lowest rating for yonks and should this decline continue, very much brings into play the merits of Ladbrokes' 13/8 against them winning between 5% - 10% of the UK vote at the GE.

I think you are over-analysing. There doesn't seem to be any discernible trend in the Labour lead in recent weeks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014

Taking YouGov, for example, in August the Labour leads have been:

3 4 5 3 5 4 4 3 2 0 4 5 1 4

I can't really see any trend there: it looks like random fluctuation around the mean of between 3% and 4%.

It's true that the UKIP vote share might be slightly easing off, but it's not a big effect.

The LibDems remains stuck in the mire.

Sorry RN, but you're wrong - this HAS been a very good week for Labour with a distinct trend in their favour. The last two You/Gov polls show them having leads of 4%, then 5% with this morning's Populus having them 6% ahead ..... that's an average lead of 5%, well ahead of other recent averages.

Does anyone have any experience working for Citi?

MaxPB said:

Does anyone have any experience working for Citi?

I do. Some time ago, though.

Scott_P said:

malcolmg said:

Party Constituency List
SNP 902915 876421
Lab 630461 523559
Tory 276652 245967
LibDem 157714 103472

How many people did NOT get the government they voted for?

Is that number bigger or smaller than the SNP vote?

Clue, things that are far away may look smaller, even though they are not

You turnip can you not understand what democracy is. The whole point of it is that the biggest supported party get to be the government, how thick can one person be.

By the way for those of you who take an interest in the markets - Janet Yellen speaks at Jackson Hole at 3p.m. UK time.

I confidently predict that markets will move before the UK close. I just can't say up or down!

Either she promises the Fed will keep blowing the bubble forever (maintain ZIRP and doveish on tapering - markets UP) or, paralleling the BoE, that the party may not last forever (ZIRP has an end date and so does QE - markets DOWN).

malcolmg said:

can you not understand what democracy is.

I understand it perfectly

It is explicitly NOT "we always get the government we vote for"

That's your problem

Scotland gets democracy at Westminster. That's how democracy works

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

The big problem with cutting the civil service by applying private sector type efficiency drives to it is that those responsible for making it happen are themselves civil servants. The Sir Humphrey resistance to change is visceral and deep rooted. An iron political will to enforce is needed - but that then erodes government/civil service relationships. And for a Labour government with strong public sector union funding it's pretty much undoable.

In my previous role I was accountable for running the monthly/quarterly financial closing and reporting activity of my employer (a multinational). About 1,000 staff involved worldwide. I was based in Manila. The UK government could centralise finance, HR, IT, office services, legal support, contracting and procurement, etc, etc, Put the service centres somewhere less expensive than London (not Manila but, say, Newcastle!) . And stop doing this is in an unco-ordinated and fragmented way across departments.

Hey Dave (or Francis Maude) put me in charge. Really. OGH host knows who I am. Give me free rein to manage and I'll save you at least a billion quid a year in admin costs.

(The civil service would have a cow).

I can't imagine the treasury being relocated to Newcastle.

No. But you can imagine the treasury's payroll, reporting, stationery, purchasing, IT support, etc, etc being merged with that of other depts and done in Newcastle. That is the point. Do in London only that which needs to be done in London.

Anyway, as another poster points out, this is starting to happen. Faster please.

That merger smells like an another IT disaster awaiting to happen.
Its best to keep it separate in order to reduce costs and complexity (and also in case something goes wrong with the computers which always happens in the end).
The NHS IT fiasco is a roadmap in what not to do.

Frontline delivery systems - fully agree. Back office admin systems - buy them off the shelf.

Patrick said:

By the way for those of you who take an interest in the markets - Janet Yellen speaks at Jackson Hole at 3p.m. UK time.

I confidently predict that markets will move before the UK close. I just can't say up or down!

Either she promises the Fed will keep blowing the bubble forever (maintain ZIRP and doveish on tapering - markets UP) or, paralleling the BoE, that the party may not last forever (ZIRP has an end date and so does QE - markets DOWN).

Well since she is a democrat from California, very Wall Street friendly and the US has a Wall Street friendly democrat president and there is a presidential election in 2 years time, the politics points to more free money until at least November 2016.

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

By the way for those of you who take an interest in the markets - Janet Yellen speaks at Jackson Hole at 3p.m. UK time.

I confidently predict that markets will move before the UK close. I just can't say up or down!

Either she promises the Fed will keep blowing the bubble forever (maintain ZIRP and doveish on tapering - markets UP) or, paralleling the BoE, that the party may not last forever (ZIRP has an end date and so does QE - markets DOWN).

Well since she is a democrat from California, very Wall Street friendly and the US has a Wall Street friendly democrat president and there is a presidential election in 2 years time, the politics points to more free money until at least November 2016.

No shit Sherlock. But when the fat lady eventually sings it's going to be a rout.

Pulpstar said:

I suspect it is just noise on the upside, though it does reinforce the notion that Labour does fundamentally have a ~ 3% lead right now.

Yes, there seems to be a consistent Labour lead of around 3% to 4% and that hasn't changed for about three months. Nor do I expect it to change in the next few weeks, barring something extraordinary, since there are unlikely to be any drivers of change until IndyRef is out of the way and we have the Conference season. After the conferences is the time to start watching for any emerging trends.

Flightpath said:

Smarmeron said:

@SouthamObserver
We were wealthy before the "crash", so where did all that wealth go to?
Interesting thought for those that take off their blinkers, is it not?

This has probably been pointed out before ... but we were not wealthy before. Brown was running a £80 billion structural deficit. ie borowing money to create an illusion of wealth. Banks/ building societies were borrowing money on the retail market and giving it out in 120% self assessed mortgages and then bundling it up, securitised them, into 'special vehicles' and reselling to other banks.
Home owners were re-mortgaging and taking money out of the value of their homes.

All smoke and mirrors from Gordon Brown

Brown was securitising mortgage debt?!! The rotter!

There's no such thing as a structural deficit. You really need to get over this abstract construction if you want to understand why Osborne is failing so badly.

@HurstLlama
In the Falklands at the landing point there was, and still probably is, a pile of discarded "issue" waterproofs, with lighter and more fold-able versions being handed out, (where they came from is a mystery).
The Royal Marines could also purchase bergens, but they had to be a specific design (Blacks green ones)
Some of the other units there, altered the "58"? webbing, but only as much as they were allowed to by their officers.
A "blind eye" can help morale of course ;-)

malcolmg said:

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

Speedy said:

Patrick said:

The big problem with cutting the civil service by applying private sector type efficiency drives to it is that those responsible for making it happen are themselves civil servants. The Sir Humphrey resistance to change is visceral and deep rooted. An iron political will to enforce is needed - but that then erodes government/civil service relationships. And for a Labour government with strong public sector union funding it's pretty much undoable.

In my previous role I was accountable for running the monthly/quarterly financial closing and reporting activity of my employer (a multinational). About 1,000 staff involved worldwide. I was based in Manila. The UK government could centralise finance, HR, IT, office services, legal support, contracting and procurement, etc, etc, Put the service centres somewhere less expensive than London (not Manila but, say, Newcastle!) . And stop doing this is in an unco-ordinated and fragmented way across departments.

Hey Dave (or Francis Maude) put me in charge. Really. OGH host knows who I am. Give me free rein to manage and I'll save you at least a billion quid a year in admin costs.

(The civil service would have a cow).

I can't imagine the treasury being relocated to Newcastle.

No. But you can imagine the treasury's payroll, reporting, stationery, purchasing, IT support, etc, etc being merged with that of other depts and done in Newcastle. That is the point. Do in London only that which needs to be done in London.

Anyway, as another poster points out, this is starting to happen. Faster please.

That merger smells like an another IT disaster awaiting to happen.
Its best to keep it separate in order to reduce costs and complexity (and also in case something goes wrong with the computers which always happens in the end).
The NHS IT fiasco is a roadmap in what not to do.

Frontline delivery systems - fully agree. Back office admin systems - buy them off the shelf.

Just not keep them in the same single system, keep them in separate systems, so that the government can do its daily business in case the computers in one of the systems crash so it would effect only one department not all.

You think it runs on one system

The suggestion was to merge them and put them in Newcastle.