politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » General Election year polling opens with LAB having small l

dr_spyn said:

Will she improve or push up Reckless's support?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-30692763

Tories reselect Tolhurst for another go at UKIP.

Would have gone with a new candidate myself, she didn't impress.

Coming soon from SLAB: we will tax the English 5% more than the SNP will tax the English....

TGOHF said:

bigjohnowls said:

MarqueeMark said:

Socrates said:

MarqueeMark said:

Socrates said:

@audreyanne

The real vulnerability for Labour on the "mansion tax" isn't the people who are worried it will hit them. It's the people in London and the home counties who feel that revenue raised almost entirely on their localities being unhappy that it's sent out of the area to pay for electoral bribes elsewhere. It's not like income tax where the South East pays a bit more than elsewhere - this is 95% a tax on the South East, and housing taxes are supposed to go to local authorities. With London having a poverty rate higher than Scotland, a lot of people will be angry that the money isn't being spent here. Especially given that the NHS in London is under a lot more pressure the NHS in Scotland.

The killer for Labour is when their opponents conflate the two - fears that Labour will HAVE to tax much lower priced houses in order to meet their obligations to Scotland (to try and save their electoral arses).

This campaign has the makings of a perfect storm for Labour. Good job they have such a top captain on the bridge....

The killer for Labour is when they can only get the measure through on Scottish votes.

Scottish votes for London taxes. What could possibly go wrong....?

Are you not a Unionist.

20000 Extra nurses message is popular no matter hoe loud Tory press and PBers squeal.

18000 in England 1000 in Wales 1000 in Scotland

All paid for by people with mansions

Only on PB is that a disaster for Ed in the real world 72% support

Why is more nurses good, more foodbanks bad ?

Both are a free resource for those in need...

If you dont know the answer to that your party is fooked.

Guido Fawkes ‏@GuidoFawkes 1m1 minute ago
No charges for Mark Pritchard

@BBCBreaking: UK police have dropped an investigation into rape claims against Conservative MP Mark Pritchard, Met says http://t.co/JHfmQTe8Y3

London needs to understand that basing an economy on financial speculation; encouraging billionaires and venture capitalists to buy up its property at the expense of local people; live off subsidies from poorer parts of the country for multi-billion transport projects, spending on government departments and vanities like the Olympics; and despite its wealth not address issues of poverty and equality is not a road to economic and political sustainability.

bigjohnowls said:

Off out for the day now happy in the knowledge that MT is popular.

Tory squealing over MT making EICIPMs job easier.

Better wake up soon or will require the removals van on in 141 days time

What you forget taxes on homes can swing elections.

It was Osborne's IHT policy in 2007 stopped the election that never was.

Socrates said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

@BBCBreaking: UK police have dropped an investigation into rape claims against Conservative MP Mark Pritchard, Met says http://t.co/JHfmQTe8Y3

A nice smearing of a man's reputation and they don't even have the evidence to take it to court. Anonymity needs to be two-way.

Agree anonymity should be a basic human right until found guilty.

Apologies if mentioned before but there was another methodological change with YouGov

For fans of Scottish subsamples

The first is a rationalisation of our sampling frame to produce a sample that better reflects the distribution of party support around Britain. Our overall demographic targets for Great Britain and the targets we use for our weighting remain unchanged, so these changes should not make any difference to our headline figures.

However we are controlling our sampling in London and Scotland more carefully, so anyone who regularly studies our crossbreaks may notice a difference within them. Most importantly, we have started including controls on ethnicity in our London sampling, an important factor in driving voting intention.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/01/06/labour-lead-3/

Alistair said:

CarlottaVance said:

Alistair said:

will be used for whatever the SNP want

Like cutting NHS Scotland by 1% while NHS England has seen its spending rise 4%?

Not the SNP's problem if the Tories need to splurge money on wasteful bureaucracy rather than getting decent efficiency savings out of the system.

So when the SNP cut spending its 'efficiency savings', but when the Tories do it its 'cuts'?

Newspeak - You know it makes sense......

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

Ah, but wasn't that before the voters got to know what she was like?

AlbionTilIDie said:

Indigo said:

AlbionTilIDie said:

Will be interesting to see if the South East cash for Scottish subsidies policy has a bigger impact in Scotland or the South East; Ed has clearly gambled on the incremental seat holds in Scotland being greater than the incremental seat losses in the South.

Once people find out that the level was actually a lie, and its going to be a much higher rate, that start much lower down the market in value, then people are going to get pissed off, and it will have an effect, but by then its too late. In order to raise the 1.2bn he wants to raise he would have to start around £1m, or as it is otherwise known, a three bedroom semi in a mediocre area of London like Barnet, then a lot of people will be annoyed, and a lot more of them are likely to be Labour voters.

Do people who live in £1 Million houses in Barnet really vote Labour anyway?

No idea, but there are currently 13 3-bedroom houses in Barnet offered above £1.25 million and therefore probably worth more than a million:
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION^93929&minPrice=1000000&maxBedrooms=3&displayPropertyType=houses&oldDisplayPropertyType=houses&googleAnalyticsChannel=buying

and 443 offered over that price of any size. So the canonical 3-bed semi is alive and well and much in evidence in Barnet.

I've tried to get to a fag-packet estimate of how many there are in total by comparing transaction numbers with total number of houses.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/monthly-property-transactions-completed-in-the-uk-with-value-40000-or-above

says there are ~ 1.2 million residential property transactions a year in the UK.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/guides/456900/456991/html/

says there are 17 million privately owned UK homes.

Grossing up, it seems that 1.2 of 17 million homes trade per year. If that ratio applies borough-wise across Barnet, there would be about 2,300 3-bed semis worth over a million in Barnet and 77,000 properties in total worth over a million in Barnet.

Those figures sound a bit high when we figure that there are about 100,000 electors in Barnet but it does give an idea of how many people will be affected when the lie about "mansions" is exposed and it turns out to be a second property tax mainly on Tory constituencies.

A fairer second tax would be one based on square footage versus occupancy, as this would dissuade people from over-housing themselves regardless of where in the country they lived. A couple in a 5,000 square foot house in Accrington would pay, a couple in a 1,200 square foot house in Barnet would not. Of course fairness is not a genuine Labour goal; "fair" in Labourspeak means exactly the same as "spite" in normal use.

UNS is rendered obsolete with the Green vote,a pointless argument.

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

Ah, but wasn't that before the voters got to know what she was like?

No. It was a week before polling day. So the voters knew what she was like.

I had wrongly supposed Labour were embarking on this campaign without a coherent strategy. It's now day three and out of the haze of last years incoherence something very clear seems to have taken shape .

It is going to be all about 'THEM' and 'US'

'US' are the party of the underprivileged the hard working and public service. 'THEM' are the party of the rich the privileged and the destroyers of public service.

I could never make sense of the dogs breakfast that was the mansion tax. Why £2,000,000? Why not incremental? Why not increase the top rates of the community charge?

But if the plan is to create a THEM and US it makes perfect sense. What's important is that the 100,000 who own these houses make a noise about it and the 58,990,000 who don't hear that noise.

It has all the simplicity of Michael Howards 'Are you thinking.....' but in my opinion it's better judged.

Another Murphy/SLAB own goal which got lost yesterday was his claim that 190,000 Scots voters have the power to decide who forms the next UK government. Seemingly SLAB's research shows they are older men living within 25 miles of Glasgow. Link to article below, as it is behind the Herald pay wall I've pasted in the relevant extract below.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/gloves-come-off-in-the-battle-to-win-over-200000-scots-who-could-decide-t.115483291

"In his speech today, Mr Murphy will reach out to 190,000 Scots he describes as "the most important voters in the UK".

The group voted Labour in the 2010 Westminster election but failed to turn out for the following year's Holyrood poll which the SNP won by a landslide.

They voted Yes in the referendum and most, according to Labour's research are older men living within 25 miles of Glasgow.

Addressing supporters at Edinburgh's Our Dynamic Earth museum, Mr Murphy will say: "They voted yes largely because they wanted rid of the Tories and wanted change.

"Now they can decide whether to vote Labour to get rid of the Tories or to vote SNP and keep the status quo.

"At the General Election these will be the most important voters in the UK.

"They will decide whether to hand David Cameron his P45."

The new Scottish Labour leader will devote a large section of his speech to discussing global insecurity and economic uncertainty, in a coded message that independence would not cure Scotland's ills.

The 190,000 target voters will each be sent personal letters during a "January offensive" to win them over."

Indigo said:

NickPalmer said:

Some of the wealthiest people I've met were way to the left of me. They will certainly be cheering on the mansion tax.

Somehow that isnt a huge surprise, when you are drowning in cash having to pay a bit more of it to the tax man isn't much of a hardship (assuming their accountants haven't found away to make it a tax on other people - a remarkable number of lefties still employ quite aggressive accounting methods considering their views). Conversely the middle aged couple with a mortgage and two teenage kids is going to notice a drop in their living standards from even a modest tax rise, so they probably aren't going to vote Labour.

Indeed. Only the very very wealthy can afford to live under a Labour government.

SouthamObserver said:

Carnyx said:

SouthamObserver said:

My hunch is that some on here may be ever so slightly overestimating the potential mansion tax downside for Labour.

As for Murphy and SLAB, surely they are just illustrating the potential redistributive benefits that Scotland derives from the Union and that we all know about anyway. The SNP can't deliver on that front, the Tories won't. Labour says the MT will deliver extra nurses across the UK. Some of these will be in Scotland. That doesn't look like a huge own goal to me. But maybe it is. We'll see.

We'd rather keep our own money in the first place! But more immediately the SLAB proposal is completely wrong-headed as SLAB cannot determine Scottish health spending decisions unless they are elected in a completely different election in 2016 - and those decisions are moreover devolved and irrelevant to this coming election. But it is routine for SLAB to complain about the SNP not doing a, b and c even when those are not devolved matters. They must have no worries that this confounds the public and destroys reasoned public debate.

A Labour government in Westminster can make the money available. If an SNP government in Holyrood does not want it, that's its decision to make.

Then they can't guarantee it. Which makes a mockery of the line that "Only Labour can deliver this pledge." They can't deliver it.

I know what the mechanics are underpinning the statement (Scotlnd's budget will rise by £250m due to a proportional share of the Mansion Tax) but that is not how they have chosen to phrase it.

They have chosen to phrase it in terms of a policy they cannot implement funded by a raid on the English.

Words matter. Scottish Laour has chosen some terrible words.

BenM said:

Downgraded George Osborne can celebrate the drop in gilt yields following the much softer Services PMI this morning.

Oh, er, wait...

Are you a BBC employee? headlines on this:

UK services sector sees slowest growth for 19 months

The UK services sector lost momentum at the end of the year, growing at its slowest rate for a year-and-a-half, an influential survey suggests.

However the quote is

Markit chief economist Chris Williamson said it would fuel concerns that the UK economy is "too fragile", but said it was too early to be worried.

"The latest PMI reading is still strong, merely down from unusually high levels earlier in the year and in line with the average seen in the years leading up to the financial crisis," he added.

Atul Hatwal election prediction at Labour Uncut:

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/01/06/some-gloomy-general-election-predictions/

As with all Labour Uncut pieces - too optimistic on Tory performance, too pessimistic about Labour, all based on assumptions about a fall in UKIP and rise in Lib Dem share that shows no sign of occurring.

CarlottaVance said:

Alistair said:

CarlottaVance said:

Alistair said:

will be used for whatever the SNP want

Like cutting NHS Scotland by 1% while NHS England has seen its spending rise 4%?

Not the SNP's problem if the Tories need to splurge money on wasteful bureaucracy rather than getting decent efficiency savings out of the system.

So when the SNP cut spending its 'efficiency savings', but when the Tories do it its 'cuts'?

Newspeak - You know it makes sense......

BBC journalists have been instructed by senior editorial staff to use ‘savings’ instead of ‘cuts’ in their news coverage

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/03/03/exclusive-bbc-journalists-ordered-to-use-savings-instead-of-cuts-in-reports/

TheWatcher said:

volcanopete said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

Socrates said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

London needs to understand that basing an economy on financial speculation; encouraging billionaires and venture capitalists to buy up its property at the expense of local people; live off subsidies from poorer parts of the country for multi-billion transport projects, spending on government departments and vanities like the Olympics; and despite its wealth not address issues of poverty and equality is not a road to economic and political sustainability.

How are we to "address issues of poverty and equality" with our wealth, if that wealth is to be taken out of the city to spend on Scotland?

Firstly, wealth is still being taken out of Scotland to spend on London (though not as much as when the oil price was higher, and not as much as is being bled out of Wales and the north of England), and secondly, if Scotland had full fiscal autonomy or independence, we wouldn't need to have this discussion.

And thirdly, if London had a fair system of local taxation, such as land value tax, that would go a long way to addressing poverty and inequality.

coke-fuelled,high speed traders,

When did computers start snorting lines?

They don't, he just envies and hates people more intelligent and successful than himself. There's an electoral franchise for envious sanctimonious losers over which Labour and UKIP are currently squabbling.

OccasionalOptimist said:

London needs to understand that basing an economy on financial speculation; encouraging billionaires and venture capitalists to buy up its property at the expense of local people; live off subsidies from poorer parts of the country for multi-billion transport projects, spending on government departments and vanities like the Olympics; and despite its wealth not address issues of poverty and equality is not a road to economic and political sustainability.

How dependent is the Scottish economy on one natural resource whose value has halved in four months?

TheWatcher said:

volcanopete said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

Socrates said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

London needs to understand that basing an economy on financial speculation; encouraging billionaires and venture capitalists to buy up its property at the expense of local people; live off subsidies from poorer parts of the country for multi-billion transport projects, spending on government departments and vanities like the Olympics; and despite its wealth not address issues of poverty and equality is not a road to economic and political sustainability.

How are we to "address issues of poverty and equality" with our wealth, if that wealth is to be taken out of the city to spend on Scotland?

Firstly, wealth is still being taken out of Scotland to spend on London (though not as much as when the oil price was higher, and not as much as is being bled out of Wales and the north of England), and secondly, if Scotland had full fiscal autonomy or independence, we wouldn't need to have this discussion.

And thirdly, if London had a fair system of local taxation, such as land value tax, that would go a long way to addressing poverty and inequality.

coke-fuelled,high speed traders,

When did computers start snorting lines?

Coke as in low-impurity coal. Presumably bank computers are so evil they must use the nastiest, most-polluting fuel to generate their power.

Socrates said:

Here's the most idiotic petition of the week:

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/more-than-20000-sign-petition-against-channel-4-sitcom-on-great-famine-30880975.html

So we can have sitcoms about the Second World War but not about the Irish Famine? Eejits.

By the Second World War are you referring to, say, Dad's Army and Allo, Allo?

I think, for example, that there would be a difference between a sitcom set in the British Home Front/Occupied France and a sitcom set in Auschwitz. So it's a bit hard to compare WWII with the Irish Famine in this context.

Not that I think the petition is a good idea, but I don't think your argument against it is sound.

Richard N

"It's the second sentence which is the absolute killer. Has raw, naked, ugly, selfish spite-driven envy been used so brazenly even by Labour at any time since Healey's "Squeeze the rich until the pips squeak"? In fact this one is even worse, adding in anti-English, anti-South East prejudice into the mix."

In that case it strikes me he has his fellow UK citizen to a tee. If the mean spiritedness of this nation was ever in doubt just look at the rise of UKIP or the way hundred's of thousands use twitter to ensure a footballer never gets another job.

Smarmeron said:

@Anorak
Coking coal is far less polluting than lignite

I know, but why let facts get in the way of a piss take. [and doesn't turning coal into coke burn a though a boat-load of energy?]

OccasionalOptimist said:

Oh well, maybe we should wait a couple of years then...

"the historical Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Reports (GERS) show that every year, for the last 32 years Scotland has generated more tax per head than the average for the UK. This quashes the oil volatility myth because a low oil price has never seen Scottish tax revenues, per head, go below that of the UK average."

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/scotlands-century-of-lost-wealth/

'Business For Scotland?

Close examination of Business for Scotland’s declared member list shows that the group has only a tiny handful of members who employ significant numbers of Scots, and literally none with a substantial cross-border trade. In other words, it could scarcely be less representative of the industries that provide the majority of Scotland’s private-sector jobs and which, according to the No campaign, are at risk from a Yes vote.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11065467/Small-firms-making-big-claims-for-Scottish-independence.html

@TheWatcher
Yes, slow this morning, I blame caffeine depletion.

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

Ah, but wasn't that before the voters got to know what she was like?

No. It was a week before polling day. So the voters knew what she was like.

Drat! You beat me with facts - not fair! :-)

You should remember, the PB Tories are always right and never wrong

The other factor re the Tories regaining Rochester, is I'm taking a six week sabbatical in April and May.

Some of those six weeks, I'll be spending in Rochester and Strood campaigning and canvassing for Kelly.

I was there for one day in November, and made sure Reckless' majority was less than the polls said it would be.

Just think what I'll be able to do if I'm there for say three weeks.

Good man. Just click the heels of your ruby slippers together three times, and it'll be in the bag.

CarlottaVance said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

Oh well, maybe we should wait a couple of years then...

"the historical Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Reports (GERS) show that every year, for the last 32 years Scotland has generated more tax per head than the average for the UK. This quashes the oil volatility myth because a low oil price has never seen Scottish tax revenues, per head, go below that of the UK average."

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/scotlands-century-of-lost-wealth/

'Business For Scotland?

Close examination of Business for Scotland’s declared member list shows that the group has only a tiny handful of members who employ significant numbers of Scots, and literally none with a substantial cross-border trade. In other words, it could scarcely be less representative of the industries that provide the majority of Scotland’s private-sector jobs and which, according to the No campaign, are at risk from a Yes vote.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11065467/Small-firms-making-big-claims-for-Scottish-independence.html

And are Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Reports (GERS) made up as well? Does the Telegraph (or someone else) have evidence of that? If not, what does the composition of an organisation have to do with the research it publishes?

Socrates said:

Conveniently making the comparison to to the "average for the UK", thus including the huge net drains of Northern Ireland and Wales, and of course, Scotland itself!

More to the point, the original claim was "wealth is still being taken out of Scotland to spend on London". One has to admire the exuberant looniness of the claim.

OccasionalOptimist said:

CarlottaVance said:

OccasionalOptimist said:

Oh well, maybe we should wait a couple of years then...

"the historical Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Reports (GERS) show that every year, for the last 32 years Scotland has generated more tax per head than the average for the UK. This quashes the oil volatility myth because a low oil price has never seen Scottish tax revenues, per head, go below that of the UK average."

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/scotlands-century-of-lost-wealth/

'Business For Scotland?

Close examination of Business for Scotland’s declared member list shows that the group has only a tiny handful of members who employ significant numbers of Scots, and literally none with a substantial cross-border trade. In other words, it could scarcely be less representative of the industries that provide the majority of Scotland’s private-sector jobs and which, according to the No campaign, are at risk from a Yes vote.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11065467/Small-firms-making-big-claims-for-Scottish-independence.html

And are Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland Reports (GERS) made up as well? Does the Telegraph (or someone else) have evidence of that? If not, what does the composition of an organisation have to do with the research it publishes?

As Socrates points out, framing things in terms of the average is the giveaway. It's agenda driven research, not disintetested research.

Socrates said:

volcanopete said:

FTT is a no-brainer for me,taxing the speculative bankers and the coke-fuelled,high speed traders,only a very tiny amount,and we could start to reverse the heartless incompetence of this government.There are huge savings to be made,too,from the Abolition of the House of Lords.The House of Lords is totally unaffordable.

Given that high-speed trading is done electronically by computer programs, it's absurd to talk of them being "coke-fuelled traders". Given that your understanding of finance is so limited you don't even know this, I'm not surprised you think a disastrous FTT is a "no brainer".

The HFT boys are more likely to be fans of real ale than cocaine.

@TheWatcher

Lathyrus linifolius if you don't mind? better than that imported foreign stuff.

Anorak said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

Ah, but wasn't that before the voters got to know what she was like?

No. It was a week before polling day. So the voters knew what she was like.

Drat! You beat me with facts - not fair! :-)

You should remember, the PB Tories are always right and never wrong

The other factor re the Tories regaining Rochester, is I'm taking a six week sabbatical in April and May.

Some of those six weeks, I'll be spending in Rochester and Strood campaigning and canvassing for Kelly.

I was there for one day in November, and made sure Reckless' majority was less than the polls said it would be.

Just think what I'll be able to do if I'm there for say three weeks.

Good man. Just click the heels of your ruby slippers together three times, and it'll be in the bag.

I didn't go to the last Dirty Dicks meet only because TSE refused to wear his ruby slippers.

MarqueeMark said:

Anorak said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SandyRentool said:

So the Conservatives have given up on regaining Rochester. Interesting development.

The Ashcroft polling showed Kelly regaining Rochester in May.

Ah, but wasn't that before the voters got to know what she was like?

No. It was a week before polling day. So the voters knew what she was like.

Drat! You beat me with facts - not fair! :-)

You should remember, the PB Tories are always right and never wrong

The other factor re the Tories regaining Rochester, is I'm taking a six week sabbatical in April and May.

Some of those six weeks, I'll be spending in Rochester and Strood campaigning and canvassing for Kelly.

I was there for one day in November, and made sure Reckless' majority was less than the polls said it would be.

Just think what I'll be able to do if I'm there for say three weeks.

Good man. Just click the heels of your ruby slippers together three times, and it'll be in the bag.

I didn't go to the last Dirty Dicks meet only because TSE refused to wear his ruby slippers.

Next PB meet, I'll wear them.

TheScreamingEagles said:

SouthamObserver said:

Socrates said:

OblitusSumMe said:

Socrates said:

Here's the most idiotic petition of the week:

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/more-than-20000-sign-petition-against-channel-4-sitcom-on-great-famine-30880975.html

So we can have sitcoms about the Second World War but not about the Irish Famine? Eejits.

By the Second World War are you referring to, say, Dad's Army and Allo, Allo?

I think, for example, that there would be a difference between a sitcom set in the British Home Front/Occupied France and a sitcom set in Auschwitz. So it's a bit hard to compare WWII with the Irish Famine in this context.

Not that I think the petition is a good idea, but I don't think your argument against it is sound.

How about Blackadder Goes Forth, which was set in the trenches of the First World War, where hundreds of thousands of young men got mowed down by machine guns, including in the final scene of the sitcom?

As for the comparison between people being deliberately exterminated in ovens, versus people dying of hunger due to a crop failure... well, that's just absurd.

I am not completely up on the Famine, but weren't the vast majority if the deaths entirely preventable? Food could have been provided to the hungry, but it wasn't.

It has been twenty years since I studied the Famine, but from what I recall, it was entirely preventable.


But because the laws prevented Irish Catholics owning the land, the land was owned by Englishmen. There was other food sources available in Ireland, as Ireland was still a net exporter of food during the potato blight.

However rather than use that food to feed the local population, it was decided it was better to sell that food, as it would earn more money, for the owners of the land who weren't Irish Catholics.

Shameful.

Boris weighs in:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/06/boris-johnson-labour-mugging-london-mansion-tax-scotland-votes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11327230/Boris-Johnson-Labours-mansion-tax-bribe-to-fund-Scottish-nurses-is-vindictive-to-South-East.html

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/360002/disag-stats.pdf

Scotland has consistently produced a higher percentage of tax take than population.

Scotland also takes a lower percentage of tax credits than population.