Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Is Kemi-kaze Badenoch about to blow an 18% lead? – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • TazTaz Posts: 16,921
    Pulpstar said:

    Pinch clamp-flation if the last in and weighted ave prices are anything to go by.
    D'oh !!!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504

    In theory that's fine, and fleshes out what I suggested above. But. Lawyers and administrators.

    It's easy to write 'shareholders and creditors get x or y pence in the pound'. I'm not sure you can differentiate between categories of creditor? But even if you can, you'd have to expect legal challenges incoming. Personally, I don't see why shareholders from a bust company get anything.

    However, more important would be keeping the lights on (or the water running, the sewage flowing and the leaks fixing) during the administration (your point 4), given what would be a snarl-up of liquidity. Who funds what, when, how and with what guarantees. Those are the dirty questions that high-level plans don't address, and where the service delivery would have the potential to become stuck.
    Keeping the system running proved quite simple for banks, in 2008.

    The money coming in for the water companies - mostly direct debits from customers - is automatic.

    This would easily pay the outgoings, when the interest and repayment of loans/bonds is stopped. It’s the excessive borrowing that is the issue.

    So, immediately after bankruptcy, no problem keeping the ship sailing.

  • eekeek Posts: 29,399

    Keeping the system running proved quite simple for banks, in 2008.

    The money coming in for the water companies - mostly direct debits from customers - is automatic.

    This would easily pay the outgoings, when the interest and repayment of loans/bonds is stopped. It’s the excessive borrowing that is the issue.

    So, immediately after bankruptcy, no problem keeping the ship sailing.

    From memory the money is also mainly owed by a holding company, remove that and provided the operating company doesn't pass the money to the holding company things should be fine..
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,149
    Scott_xP said:

    Umm. Did "hard man of #Brexit" Steve Baker just include "Vote Leave, Take Back Control" in a list of examples of oversimplification that lead to errors?

    I think he might have, you know. ~AA #PoliticsLive

    https://x.com/BestForBritain/status/1841087840932807145

    He's perhaps the politician for whom my opinion has most improved* over the past 3-4 years. He's either far more thoughtful and nuanced than he seemed, or has become so.

    *to be fair, this is not a very strong field, indeed I'm struggling to think of many others at all of whom I have a better opinion now than, say, 2020. Hunt, maybe.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    O/T

    Apparently around 73% of people tend to get this puzzle wrong.

    "Jack is looking at Anne, Anne is looking at George. Jack is married, George is unmarried, we don't know whether Anne is married or not. Is an married person looking at an umarried person? Possible answers: yes, no, we don't have enough information to say".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct5tqp
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,111

    Keeping the system running proved quite simple for banks, in 2008.

    The money coming in for the water companies - mostly direct debits from customers - is automatic.

    This would easily pay the outgoings, when the interest and repayment of loans/bonds is stopped. It’s the excessive borrowing that is the issue.

    So, immediately after bankruptcy, no problem keeping the ship sailing.

    Keeping the banks running was simple because they weren't allowed to go bust, in the formal sense. Or not at the time of greatest crisis anyway; some were sold / run down later. That meant that administrations or the financial equivalent didn't come into play (and hence plenty of people got away with a lot more than they should have done).

    I agree that in theory, it shouldn't be an issue for water companies. I just suspect that in practice it wouldn't run so smoothly given that an administrators first duty in law is to the creditors.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,800
    edited October 2024
    Sky reporting the US has intelligence that Iran is imminently about to launch ballistics missiles on Israel
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,149
    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    Apparently around 73% of people tend to get this puzzle wrong.

    "Jack is looking at Anne, Anne is looking at George. Jack is married, George is unmarried, we don't know whether Anne is married or not. Is an married person looking at an umarried person? Possible answers: yes, no, we don't have enough information to say".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct5tqp

    Yes?

    Jack (married) is looking at Anne (marriage unknown) who is looking at George (unmarried)

    If Anne is married, then married Anne is looking at unmarried George -> Yes
    If Anne is not married then married Jack is looking at unmarried Anne -> Yes

    What do people say, not enough info?

    Either Anne or Jack might be in a spot of bother with their spouse for checking out an unmarried man/woman :wink:
  • kenObikenObi Posts: 245

    The new Secretary of State (Steve Reed) has also been captured by them already: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/sep/29/labour-water-industry-analysis-argue-against-nationalisation


    In normal circumstances it would cost a huge amount to nationalise the water companies, however there are special cases.

    Thames is drifting into special administration, its just a matter of when.
    Government can't really force it without the inevitable claims in the courts.

    Canadian pension fund Omers (the largest shareholder) has written its entire stake off already.

    The question is how much the bondholders (frequently more litigious) write off.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    Selebian said:

    Yes?

    Jack (married) is looking at Anne (marriage unknown) who is looking at George (unmarried)

    If Anne is married, then married Anne is looking at unmarried George -> Yes
    If Anne is not married then married Jack is looking at unmarried Anne -> Yes

    What do people say, not enough info?

    Either Anne or Jack might be in a spot of bother with their spouse for checking out an unmarried man/woman :wink:
    Correct on all counts.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,202
    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1841096663244423499

    Confidence about investment decisions has fallen from +36 in August to -6 today.

    That is entirely because of Starmer & Reeves messaging.

    Labour has no ideological basis, or cadre. As I wrote last week, that means things can go south - fast.
  • Ok, I thought Jenrick might have been putting on derangement to appeal to a certain section of the party, but no, he’s the real deal.

    https://x.com/jessicaelgot/status/1841102812500910439?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,108
    Taz said:
    She's true to herself: she's a libertarian, not a Tory. I was listening to In Our Time on Disraeli earlier. If only the Conservative Party had someone like him available.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,108
    Taz said:
    She's true to herself: she's a libertarian, not a Tory. I was listening to In Our Time on Disraeli earlier. If only the Conservative Party had someone like him available.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,921

    Sky reporting the US has intelligence that Iran is imminently about to launch ballistics missiles on Israel

    Not just Sky now. Quite a few American broadcasters too.

    Brace brace as Leon would say.
  • Taz said:

    Not just Sky now. Quite a few American broadcasters too.

    Brace brace as Leon would say.
    I’m on a brief break from PB on Thursday/Friday.

    Just saying.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,119
    Taz said:

    Not just Sky now. Quite a few American broadcasters too.

    Brace brace as Leon would say.
    Didn't this happen a couple of months ago, and amounted to nothing?

    A bigger worry would be if Iran persuaded the Russians to give the Houthis some Onyx anti-ship missiles.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,771
    Selebian said:

    Yes?

    Jack (married) is looking at Anne (marriage unknown) who is looking at George (unmarried)

    If Anne is married, then married Anne is looking at unmarried George -> Yes
    If Anne is not married then married Jack is looking at unmarried Anne -> Yes

    What do people say, not enough info?

    Either Anne or Jack might be in a spot of bother with their spouse for checking out an unmarried man/woman :wink:
    I like the chicken and egg question.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,111
    Selebian said:

    He's perhaps the politician for whom my opinion has most improved* over the past 3-4 years. He's either far more thoughtful and nuanced than he seemed, or has become so.

    *to be fair, this is not a very strong field, indeed I'm struggling to think of many others at all of whom I have a better opinion now than, say, 2020. Hunt, maybe.
    Hunt was a decent Foreign Secretary at a difficult time under Theresa May. I'm not sure he's improved much since then. Not as much as Baker anyway.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,792
    edited October 2024
    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    Apparently around 73% of people tend to get this puzzle wrong.

    "Jack is looking at Anne, Anne is looking at George. Jack is married, George is unmarried, we don't know whether Anne is married or not. Is an married person looking at an umarried person? Possible answers: yes, no, we don't have enough information to say".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct5tqp

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    For info: Greens still very much trying to kill the A9 and A96 upgrading. John Swinney's gonna have to do a deal with someone to pass his budget. Wonder who?

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/politics/6591322/a9-dualling-a96-climate-greens/

    "The remaining single carriage sections of the A9 should go through a “climate test” before the SNP Government can spend millions on its dualling project, according to Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie.

    "The former government minister laid down a marker on further spending ahead of tough financial decisions in First Minister John Swinney’s budget later this year.

    "Mr Harvie’s suggestion would lead to further delays to the long-overdue commitment to dual the route all the way between Inverness and Perth.

    "It would be similar to the approach to the A96 Aberdeen-Inverness road, which is also long overdue while a report on its future gathers dust in government headquarters."
    Those two dualling projects are the Scottish equivalent of the Stonehenge Tunnell and the Brynglas bypass.

    JFDI, preferably a decade or two ago. It gets to the point where not fixing these transport bottlenecks has a significant effect on productivity and GDP.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    edited October 2024
    Taz said:

    Not just Sky now. Quite a few American broadcasters too.

    Brace brace as Leon would say.
    Performative.

    Israel has invested more in missile defence than almost anyone else. To the point that the US military buys their tech*

    Any ballistic missiles fired from Iran have a very, very high probability of being intercepted.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_3

    The Iranians know this. The Israelis know this. The Americans know this. Everybody knows.

    *This is more political than technical. In US based development, money has to be be given to the right contractors, under cost plus programs designed to support a pyramid on subcontractors who then donate to the right politicians. In Israel, missile defence is urgent enough that it has to work and be affordable.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,617

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.

    You're right on the cash there.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    edited October 2024

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.

    I didn't invent it, and I'm not a fan of it particularly. Happy to stop writing it.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,792
    Andy_JS said:

    I didn't invent it, and I'm not a fan of it particularly.
    I didn't say you did invent it. But you would be wise to avoid its use!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Nigelb said:

    You're right, and I have misremembered the term in post.
    But it doesn't change the principle at all.

    Once they're gone, that's it.

    https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2022-01-12
    ...Every program manager arrives at DARPA with an expiration date on their badges. It’s a short-term deal that constantly brings in new blood and is routinely cited as part of DARPA’s “special sauce.” Those who become PMs know their jobs likely will end three to five years after they start. Yet so many of them say there is no better job and that they wouldn’t have it any other way. Their collective message is that being a DARPA PM can be a dream job for just about any scientist or engineer, whether they are only beginning to rev up their careers; already making a name for their themselves in an academic, start-up, industry, or government setting; or in search of a second-career to apply the experience and wisdom they have accrued over previous decades of work...

    It's the projects are shorter.
    The amazing thing is the DARPA budget, $4bn out of $6trn Federal spending, 0.067%. The UK budget is about £1trn these days, so give it £1bn to work with.

    It will take time to set up and start seeing returns, but what the US does with those projects has been transformative to so many industries and spawned many new industries over the decades.

    Remember that we have already spent a quarter of a billion on the planning documentation for the Thames Lower Crossing.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,219
    It’s starting to feel like this is going to end (or start, depending on your interpretation) with Israel going after the Iranian nuclear sites?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,708
    Taz said:

    Not just Sky now. Quite a few American broadcasters too.

    Brace brace as Leon would say.
    Daniel Hagari, the Israeli military spokesman, just announced that the United States had informed Israel that it had identified Iranian preparations to imminently fire missiles at Israel.

    NY Times
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,287
    edited October 2024
    .

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.

    Except everyone knows what it means.

    PB is also the chemical symbol for lead. Just saying.
    Or an abbreviation for personal best.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,149

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.

    'PB' really annoys me. What does it even mean? Prose Breaking? Particularly Bothering? Poster Bugging? Pernicious Brevity? :wink:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Nigelb said:

    Anyone bothering to stay up for tonight's debate ?

    God no, but I’ll be getting up early. It’s 5am for me, and I’m up at 5:30 anyway.

    I’m genuinely fascinated by these two characters, they’re both very different to those at the top of the tickets, and have records as state governors to defend and to shape their vision.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,119

    Good puzzle (although I got it right so Mandy Rice-Davies).

    BUT...

    O/T (off topic, presumably?) is another horrid PB abbreviation that really grates. It's the same as on topic (O/T) so entirely pointless and useless as an abbreviation.
    Perhaps we could adopt the German grammar for this situation and then we would have OT = On Topic and NOT = Not On Topic?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,644
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Except everyone knows what it means.

    PB is also the chemical symbol for lead. Just saying.
    Or an abbreviation for personal best.
    Yes, you can tell whether the poster means off topic or on topic (almost never the latter, FWIW) by whether the post is off topic or on topic.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,243

    It’s starting to feel like this is going to end (or start, depending on your interpretation) with Israel going after the Iranian nuclear sites?

    There is a reason Iran has Hezbollah and Hamas armed with missiles on Israel's border. And that is because both can threaten to hit Israel hard and faster than Iran possibly could. And Israel is seemingly being quite successful at degrading the capabilities of Hezbollah.

    In contrast, Iran and Israel lobbing missiles at each other from 600 miles away is unlikely to do much damage to either. But sabotage within Iran from Israel seems much more likely to cause damage, if chosen.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    Letting the water companies go bust, while protecting the actual suppliers of actual goods and services to the water companies is perfectly possible.

    The simplest method is -

    1) a water company folds
    2) the government guarantees a loan, specifically ring fenced to pay suppliers.
    3) the shareholders and and the bond holders get a Richard III style haircut.
    4) the water company carries on delivering water, under the administrators.
    5) without all the debt, paying back the loan from 2) will be trivial.
    6) the government should be able to make a profit on 2)
    Well quite. The last ‘restucturing’, that was clearly intended to pay dividends with debt, should result in everyone involved getting a large haircut. The shareholders should get nothing and the bondholders a few pennies, perhaps next time the latter should look more closely at what they’re financing.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,111

    Perhaps we could adopt the German grammar for this situation and then we would have OT = On Topic and NOT = Not On Topic?
    OnT / OfT

    Or we could just write it out. It's really not many letters and we're not using first generation mobiles.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,224
    Nigelb said:

    Is he drunk, or is that just a poor attempt at an Osborne/Truss power stance ?
    Truss?
  • NEW THREAD

  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,401

    Ok, I thought Jenrick might have been putting on derangement to appeal to a certain section of the party, but no, he’s the real deal.

    https://x.com/jessicaelgot/status/1841102812500910439?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

    Naming your son Keir, of course, totally normal behaviour.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,792
    Cookie said:

    Yes, you can tell whether the poster means off topic or on topic (almost never the latter, FWIW) by whether the post is off topic or on topic.
    I then have to look at what the topic is, which I only sometimes do.
  • FossFoss Posts: 1,301
    I wonder if the Jordanians will continue to try and intercept missiles flying over their territory.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,792
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Except everyone knows what it means.

    PB is also the chemical symbol for lead. Just saying.
    Or an abbreviation for personal best.
    Well, granted, it's certainly easier to guess than some of the teeth-grinding in-speak on here: IANAL, IANAE, IANAD etc etc.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,399

    OnT / OfT

    Or we could just write it out. It's really not many letters and we're not using first generation mobiles.
    Why would anyone bother to say their post was On Topic.

    Once you know one of the two possibilities is not plausible the abbreviation makes perfect sense..
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,224
    ...
    Selebian said:

    'PB' really annoys me. What does it even mean? Prose Breaking? Particularly Bothering? Poster Bugging? Pernicious Brevity? :wink:
    Discussions are so rarely 'On Topic', it seems rather a rather unnecessary and somewhat ostentatious notification.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,785
    Sandpit said:

    Those two dualling projects are the Scottish equivalent of the Stonehenge Tunnell and the Brynglas bypass.

    JFDI, preferably a decade or two ago. It gets to the point where not fixing these transport bottlenecks has a significant effect on productivity and GDP.
    Hmm, in terms of road mileage things are a bit more complicated, and the need for motorways/dual carriageways isn't as clear cut. Since 2007:

    HGV mileage is down 12%
    Car mileage is up 4%
    Smaller commercial vehicles up 55% (I think this is mainly home delivery in the cities)

    You'd certainly want to bypass the towns on the A96, but a much cheaper way to reduce crashes (which cause most of the congestion) on the A9 would be to drop the limit to 40mph at the main junctions where almost all the crashes happen.

    This drop in HGV traffic in the north of Scotland, which serves the main industries like agriculture, forestry, energy, some manufacturing, is a much bigger concern than anything else imo, and not linked to the availability of road infrastructure which has actually improved quite a bit up here (particularly around Aberdeen).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    edited October 2024
    kenObi said:



    In normal circumstances it would cost a huge amount to nationalise the water companies, however there are special cases.

    Thames is drifting into special administration, its just a matter of when.
    Government can't really force it without the inevitable claims in the courts.

    Canadian pension fund Omers (the largest shareholder) has written its entire stake off already.

    The question is how much the bondholders (frequently more litigious) write off.
    Let the bondholders sue the shareholders and directors. Have Parliament pass primary legislation if necessary.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,888

    Well, granted, it's certainly easier to guess than some of the teeth-grinding in-speak on here: IANAL, IANAE, IANAD etc etc.
    Aw, diddums. I would expect someone who is so up with da yoof as to deny all possible use cases for cash, to be able to cope with a few abbreviations or acronyms.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,166
    dixiedean said:

    Trump lying?
    Whatever next?
    It could be a pinned post on every header.
    Where are the usual "both sidesers" to tell us it's more nuanced than that, and also btw Kamala Harris once exited a roundabout without indicating so they're all the same.
This discussion has been closed.