politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Survation test a constituency specific question in its new
Comments
-
Murray beats Kyrgios 6:3 7:6 6:3 in the Australian Open to reach the semi-final0
-
Here's some figures for Ed to be asked about how his plan with work.
90% of home care is now provided by independent sector. There are over 350,000 people working in home care and 500,000 people receiving it.
So 5000 is an absolute drop in the bucket, and most councils don't do "home care" anymore, they just pay for private companies to do the work. So who are these 5000 people going to work for and how are they going to have any impact?
I doubt 5000 will even cope with the extra demand that year on year an aging population. Already the number of home care hours provided is up massively, but those in the services tell you more and more people are missing out on any support.
So his "army" of new home carers are going to have zero impact on 15 minute visits...all that will happen is perhaps that it will help provide a bit more supply to the massive demand.
It is a totally empty words and he has stated no reorganization, when actually that is the only real way that home care provision can be tackled. Throwing a few more low paid staff at it will do virtually nothing, a total overhaul of the system is required, but Ed has completely ruled that out.0 -
You realise that ~80-90% of the GDP of every advanced economy is services, right? To meet your conditions of (a) higher than 2.6% growth and (b) growth dominated by non-services, the non-service segment of the economy would have to be growing at 8% a year!BenM said:
6 years from the crash and after scuppering the recovery that was in place in 2009-10 all Osborne can muster is a 2.6% level of growth driven yet again by services?CarlottaVance said:
Priceless!BenM said:That's a poor GDP growth number.
The Press Association's take:
The annual figure is the best since 2007, before the recession, and indicates that the UK is likely to have been the world's fastest growing major economy last year.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-2927595/UK-economy-2-6-growth.html#ixzz3Q13T8YDH
This is economic blitzkrieg by a clueless Tory Party, floundering after their precious plan A predictably failed, clinging desperately to a mini spike in GDP driven almost entirely by super low interest rates rather than any policy put forward by this keystone cops of a government, and it follows that the only Party promising chaos should they be allowed anywhere near the levers of power after 7th May is, yet again, the Conservative Party.
As for fastest growth in G7 claim - we await the US's Q4 number, we note how Osborne usually ends up getting downgraded a few months on (that Q3 0.7% looks ripe for a subsequent downgrade), and speeding up after all your rivals have lapped you is not a very great achievement.0 -
Look at all those "Peak Kippers"!!!
.. and the direction of the line....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ · 4m4 minutes ago
Start of the most important 100 days in Ukip's history? Ukip in the polls May 2010-present (data from @pollingobs) -> pic.twitter.com/bUYnYrCy8T
0 -
Yet he's lying to the voters when he says he wants the debates. As even his own biographer is admitting.TGOHF said:
But the negotiations arent with the voters - they are with Farage and Ed. Dur...Socrates said:
You really don't get how voters can think politicians should be tough in international negotiations but honest with voters?TGOHF said:
Amusing that the dastardly cad who is too spineless to negotiate with Europe is being castigated for playing hardball over the piffling matter of tv debates.isam said:
One of the headlines from the sun readers manifesto is that they want less political game playing and more honesty/straight answersisam said:
Meanwhile David Cameron is trying to filibuster the debates that the public want by playing self satisfied political games
Remarkable.0 -
I didn't concede any point in particular, but you might like to consider how many people had t pay a stupid tax schedule for many years till the SNP got things going in the first place.TGOHF said:
Is there much balance and parity in "The National" ?Carnyx said:[snip]
On the DT, I don't remember anyone on PB pointing out Stephen Daisley's (no great Nat he) hatchet job on its main Scottish star ...
'The issue isn't bias -- that perennial obsession of certain Nationalists who, in symbiotic inversion of the author, see Unionist stooges behind every byline -- for Cochrane is editor and columnist on a paper known for its ardent pro-Union stance. What is objectionable about Cochrane's account of his conduct during the referendum is his open and unabashed disregard for the basic tenets of journalism. He repeatedly refers to the No campaign using the first person plural and it soon becomes clear why.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303773-stephen-daisley-reviews-the-alan-cochrane-referendum-diaries/
And a particulary nice one for PBers
'It’s a pity we can’t fiddle an opinion poll nowadays; the buggers put all their results online.'
'Jenny said I should do what Darling asks. He’s in charge after all. It’s not really good journalism but what the hell does journalism matter? This is much more important.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303682-stephen-daisley-picks-out-the-best-quotes-from-the-alan-cochrane-diaries/
Kudos for conceding the point on the SNP tax retreat though.
The quote are from STV, so you are indulging in whataabootery like a fan of a certain footie team; but now you mention the National, I read both it and the Herald. (How do you know what is in the National, BTW? Electronic sub? It doesn't have a website and I don't suppose there are many paper copies in Essex or wherever it is you live, as I seem to recall.) But it' still a very minority newspaper compared with the bulk of the media sold in Scotland, so still a very necessary corrective. Perhaps unfairly I see it as an insurance policy by the owners of the Herald (daily). TBH I'd much rather have the two combined to get back to something more middle of the road like the old Scotsman of past days before it was wrecked.
0 -
Why doesn't David debate Nigel so that he can pin him down on this? Oh yes, because Cameron knows Farage would wipe the floor with him...CarlottaVance said:
Well, it beats explaining where Nigel's £3billion for the NHS is coming from......(that's his job, isn't it?isam said:Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynnmep)
27/01/2015 09:12
Cracking idea for TV debate Cam may go for: Just him with Amjad to represent all other parties, because he has belonged to so many of them!0 -
Southend seems interesting, I reckon that on the (South)/East Coast with Labour really being nowhere in alot of seats we could see pro-UKIP tactical voting to stuff the Conservatives.isam said:Look at all those "Peak Kippers"!!!
.. and the direction of the line....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ · 4m4 minutes ago
Start of the most important 100 days in Ukip's history? Ukip in the polls May 2010-present (data from @pollingobs) -> pic.twitter.com/bUYnYrCy8T0 -
Good to see a supporter of Scottish Indy doing well.JackW said:Murray beats Kyrgios 6:3 7:6 6:3 in the Australian Open to reach the semi-final
0 -
Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.0 -
I don't even understand why there are more than a handful of Somali migrants in the UK. Given their country is a train wreck, they're hardly training up skilled migrants, and I can't see many lovestruck teenagers meeting their spouses on romantic weekends in Mogadishu.dr_spyn said:Lib Dem having doubts about benefits of demographic changes or is it just mischief from the press.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11370963/Somali-immigrants-cause-pub-closures-says-minister.html
Of course, most Somali migrants here are refugees and asylum seekers. But why do we keep them here? There is a perfectly functional and stable Somali state, underpinned with crap loads of British aid money, in the northern part of Somalia. It's called Somaliland. Any Somalis fleeing the civil war can be given a place to live there - and in their own culture, given that most of them aren't interested in integrating with ours.0 -
I am really looking forward to the UKIP manifesto. It's going to be a hoot....0
-
The Tories have already started campaigning on this. I received a leaflet last week though, from memory, it went wider than the mansion tax and seemed to imply that Labour would end up taxing all homes.foxinsoxuk said:
Some quite good constituency data, I have a dabble on a few of these myself.Casino_Royale said:
A Conservative overall majority is a massive ask. To anyone interested in betting on that I'd recommend taking a look at the sorts of seats they'd need to take from Labour to do that.antifrank said:
You can (still) get much better odds than 5/1 on quite a few of these:
https://royaleleseaux.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/could-the-conservatives-win-an-overall-majority-in-the-2015-general-election-next-year-part-2/
Hampstead will be interesting, I think the mansion tax and Greens could see the Conservatives home here.
Glenda is not worried about the seat. She is not standing again.audreyanne said:
Me too. Glenda is worried. Notwithstanding my previous posts there are some Labour London seats that are vulnerable.foxinsoxuk said:Casino_Royale said:
A Conservative overall majority is a massive ask. To anyone interested in betting on that I'd recommend taking a look at the sorts of seats they'd need to take from Labour to do that.antifrank said:Odd that Lord Ashcroft finds rises in Lib Dem support (even in seats where the Lib Dems aren't in contention) when respondents are prompted to think of their constituency and Survation finds no change at all. The other figures are fairly consistent though.
NB despite all the excitement last night, the story seems to be one of Labour falling support rather than Conservative rising support. That does not seem to presage a Conservative overall majority to me. If the Tories start rising in the polls above 31%, I may revise my opinion, but not before.
You can (still) get much better odds than 5/1 on quite a few of these:
https://royaleleseaux.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/could-the-conservatives-win-an-overall-majority-in-the-2015-general-election-next-year-part-2/
Hampstead will be interesting, I think the mansion tax and Greens could see the Conservatives home here.
If she's worried it may be about paying it since, as Dan Hodges revealed a while back, his mother lives in a house which is liable to the mansion tax and as an ex-MP Glenda would not be able to claim the tax on expenses.
0 -
Yes I think, maybe a bit of a leftfield idea, but people that commute from Essex into London daily get a slice of the effects of mass immigration without living in places where there are lots of immigrants... that could be a reason why parties that want controls on immigration are popularPulpstar said:
Southend seems interesting, I reckon that on the (South)/East Coast with Labour really being nowhere in alot of seats we could see pro-UKIP tactical voting to stuff the Conservatives.isam said:Look at all those "Peak Kippers"!!!
.. and the direction of the line....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ · 4m4 minutes ago
Start of the most important 100 days in Ukip's history? Ukip in the polls May 2010-present (data from @pollingobs) -> pic.twitter.com/bUYnYrCy8T
If you look at constituencies on the Southend to Fenchurch St line (c2c) or Southend to Liverpool St line, many will be UKIP friendly (until you get to Barking (c2c) and Ilford (Liv St) )
I live in Upminster and the change in demographic between Barking & Limehouse is incredible, same goes for the tube0 -
I'll tot up my kipper bets and send you the 'book' this evening.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.0 -
Extremely. Think of a Cyber-Nat toddler on a Sunny Delight sugar rush. You'll find rich pickings.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.
0 -
Oh reaeeeaaallly???antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.
Well I do keep offering bets for people to take, and they are generally UKIP friendly... no one bites
What bets do you and I have by the way?0 -
I suspect it may turn into a bit of a movable feast......and by 2019 will be 'total crap' is the technical term, isn't it?MarqueeMark said:I am really looking forward to the UKIP manifesto. It's going to be a hoot....
0 -
Hmm, a kipper confirms that he is eight stops beyond Barking...isam said:
Yes I think, maybe a bit of a leftfield idea, but people that commute from Essex into London daily get a slice of the effects of mass immigration without living in places where there are lots of immigrants... that could be a reason why parties that want controls on immigration are popularPulpstar said:
Southend seems interesting, I reckon that on the (South)/East Coast with Labour really being nowhere in alot of seats we could see pro-UKIP tactical voting to stuff the Conservatives.isam said:Look at all those "Peak Kippers"!!!
.. and the direction of the line....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ · 4m4 minutes ago
Start of the most important 100 days in Ukip's history? Ukip in the polls May 2010-present (data from @pollingobs) -> pic.twitter.com/bUYnYrCy8T
If you look at constituencies on the Southend to Fenchurch St line (c2c) or Southend to Liverpool St line, many will be UKIP friendly (until you get to Barking (c2c) and Ilford (Liv St) )
I live in Upminster and the change in demographic between Barking & Limehouse is incredible, same goes for the tube0 -
@Antifrank Feel free to plough into the 1-50 on the Tories in the Southend seats
0 -
She's been largely invisible in my ward. But so was Glenda. The Lib Dems are canvassing hard as are the Tories but, despite - to my mind - the Lib Dems having the best candidate, the Lib Dems will lose votes and Labour will win.foxinsoxuk said:
I missed that post. I shall do my own research, On constituencies I am mostly making bets at low stakes, and shall stick to Shadsy and colleagues.peter_from_putney said:
That's telling you foxinsoxuk ..... in PtP's unfailingly polite but nevertheless unequivocal manner which party is set to win Hampstead & Kilburn. Exhibiting such strong conviction and with one of the smartest betting brains on this website, I'd keep your money in your pocket if I were you.Peter_the_Punter said:
Taffy posted something similar a few days back, Fox.foxinsoxuk said:
Some quite good constituency data, I have a dabble on a few of these myself.Casino_Royale said:
A Conservative overall majority is a massive ask. To anyone interested in betting on that I'd recommend taking a look at the sorts of seats they'd need to take from Labour to do that.antifrank said:Odd that Lord Ashcroft finds rises in Lib Dem support (even in seats where the Lib Dems aren't in contention) when respondents are prompted to think of their constituency and Survation finds no change at all. The other figures are fairly consistent though.
NB despite all the excitement last night, the story seems to be one of Labour falling support rather than Conservative rising support. That does not seem to presage a Conservative overall majority to me. If the Tories start rising in the polls above 31%, I may revise my opinion, but not before.
You can (still) get much better odds than 5/1 on quite a few of these:
https://royaleleseaux.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/could-the-conservatives-win-an-overall-majority-in-the-2015-general-election-next-year-part-2/
Hampstead will be interesting, I think the mansion tax and Greens could see the Conservatives home here.
Labour are 1/4 and I offered to better the Oddschecker prices if he - or anybody else - was interested in backing anybody but Labour in Hampstead.
I wasn't exactly knocked over in the rush, but the offer still stands if you are interested.
Is Tulip Sidique that popular? Glenda is a hard act to follow.
0 -
I see it as eight stops before!antifrank said:
Hmm, a kipper confirms that he is eight stops beyond Barking...isam said:
Yes I think, maybe a bit of a leftfield idea, but people that commute from Essex into London daily get a slice of the effects of mass immigration without living in places where there are lots of immigrants... that could be a reason why parties that want controls on immigration are popularPulpstar said:
Southend seems interesting, I reckon that on the (South)/East Coast with Labour really being nowhere in alot of seats we could see pro-UKIP tactical voting to stuff the Conservatives.isam said:Look at all those "Peak Kippers"!!!
.. and the direction of the line....
Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ · 4m4 minutes ago
Start of the most important 100 days in Ukip's history? Ukip in the polls May 2010-present (data from @pollingobs) -> pic.twitter.com/bUYnYrCy8T
If you look at constituencies on the Southend to Fenchurch St line (c2c) or Southend to Liverpool St line, many will be UKIP friendly (until you get to Barking (c2c) and Ilford (Liv St) )
I live in Upminster and the change in demographic between Barking & Limehouse is incredible, same goes for the tube0 -
I wasn't being snide on this occasion. I've got some UKIP long shots which have come in by varying degrees. I'm trying to work out whether they have value that can be laid off on betfair in the election campaign and if so to estimate what I may get for them.isam said:
Oh reaeeeaaallly???antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.
Well I do keep offering bets for people to take, and they are generally UKIP friendly... no one bites
What bets do you and I have by the way?0 -
I agree with that 100%.Cyclefree said:
She's been largely invisible in my ward. But so was Glenda. The Lib Dems are canvassing hard as are the Tories but, despite - to my mind - the Lib Dems having the best candidate, the Lib Dems will lose votes and Labour will win.foxinsoxuk said:
I missed that post. I shall do my own research, On constituencies I am mostly making bets at low stakes, and shall stick to Shadsy and colleagues.peter_from_putney said:
That's telling you foxinsoxuk ..... in PtP's unfailingly polite but nevertheless unequivocal manner which party is set to win Hampstead & Kilburn. Exhibiting such strong conviction and with one of the smartest betting brains on this website, I'd keep your money in your pocket if I were you.Peter_the_Punter said:
Taffy posted something similar a few days back, Fox.foxinsoxuk said:
Some quite good constituency data, I have a dabble on a few of these myself.Casino_Royale said:
A Conservative overall majority is a massive ask. To anyone interested in betting on that I'd recommend taking a look at the sorts of seats they'd need to take from Labour to do that.antifrank said:Odd that Lord Ashcroft finds rises in Lib Dem support (even in seats where the Lib Dems aren't in contention) when respondents are prompted to think of their constituency and Survation finds no change at all. The other figures are fairly consistent though.
NB despite all the excitement last night, the story seems to be one of Labour falling support rather than Conservative rising support. That does not seem to presage a Conservative overall majority to me. If the Tories start rising in the polls above 31%, I may revise my opinion, but not before.
You can (still) get much better odds than 5/1 on quite a few of these:
https://royaleleseaux.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/could-the-conservatives-win-an-overall-majority-in-the-2015-general-election-next-year-part-2/
Hampstead will be interesting, I think the mansion tax and Greens could see the Conservatives home here.
Labour are 1/4 and I offered to better the Oddschecker prices if he - or anybody else - was interested in backing anybody but Labour in Hampstead.
I wasn't exactly knocked over in the rush, but the offer still stands if you are interested.
Is Tulip Sidique that popular? Glenda is a hard act to follow.0 -
With a small number of players, the correct anti-UKIP tactic would be to expose the split inherent in UKIP's broad church, with the aim of repelling half their supporters. Now Cameron has managed to get the world and his wife invited to the debates, it will just be a bunch of opposition parties complaining about the government.Socrates said:
Why doesn't David debate Nigel so that he can pin him down on this? Oh yes, because Cameron knows Farage would wipe the floor with him...CarlottaVance said:
Well, it beats explaining where Nigel's £3billion for the NHS is coming from......(that's his job, isn't it?isam said:Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynnmep)
27/01/2015 09:12
Cracking idea for TV debate Cam may go for: Just him with Amjad to represent all other parties, because he has belonged to so many of them!0 -
The national constituency-related question presumably includes significantly larger local effects.
One possible black swan is worth noting, perhaps. Survation, for whatever reason, always have high VI for UKIP, and in this one they're just a 4% swing away from overtaking one of the largest parties. A single event helpful to UKIP (e.g. Farage doing well in a debate) and a bit of sampling variation could make it happen, and that would undoubtedly be a huge Cleggasm-style news story which might become self-fulfilling, (or conversely provoke a reaction to rally people to the big parties, or who knows what). I don't think it's that likely, but it's worth keeping in mind.
Another point is the next 9 weeks are peak time for whatever effect the Tory direct mail barrage may have - they are pouring out at the moment (including, bizarrely, a letter from the ECR group signed by that well-known ECR member David Cameron - presumably something to do with European Parliament funding rules allowing the ECR to send stuff separately but include friendly non-MEPs). Labour's doing it too but is heavily outfunded. That will last until March when the flow will even up in the short campaign (both major parties can spend to the limit on that).0 -
Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.0 -
"My view is that this close to the election that there should be only one question and that should be constituency specific getting people to think about the candidates. After all in general elections the actual choice is for an individual to be our MP not a party."
A valid point, as long as the next question is, name your candidate, and only those who are right are taken into account. I suspect it would be a pretty low number.0 -
Flashy thinks balance is having a saltire photo-shopped into a swastika on a front page, while lack of balance is having photos of Nazi-saluting, Union flag waving, rioting 'the Rangers' supporters on a front page.Carnyx said:
I didn't concede any point in particular, but you might like to consider how many people had t pay a stupid tax schedule for many years till the SNP got things going in the first place.TGOHF said:
Is there much balance and parity in "The National" ?Carnyx said:[snip]
On the DT, I don't remember anyone on PB pointing out Stephen Daisley's (no great Nat he) hatchet job on its main Scottish star ...
'The issue isn't bias -- that perennial obsession of certain Nationalists who, in symbiotic inversion of the author, see Unionist stooges behind every byline -- for Cochrane is editor and columnist on a paper known for its ardent pro-Union stance. What is objectionable about Cochrane's account of his conduct during the referendum is his open and unabashed disregard for the basic tenets of journalism. He repeatedly refers to the No campaign using the first person plural and it soon becomes clear why.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303773-stephen-daisley-reviews-the-alan-cochrane-referendum-diaries/
And a particulary nice one for PBers
'It’s a pity we can’t fiddle an opinion poll nowadays; the buggers put all their results online.'
'Jenny said I should do what Darling asks. He’s in charge after all. It’s not really good journalism but what the hell does journalism matter? This is much more important.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303682-stephen-daisley-picks-out-the-best-quotes-from-the-alan-cochrane-diaries/
Kudos for conceding the point on the SNP tax retreat though.
The quote are from STV, so you are indulging in whataabootery like a fan of a certain footie team; but now you mention the National, I read both it and the Herald. (How do you know what is in the National, BTW? Electronic sub? It doesn't have a website and I don't suppose there are many paper copies in Essex or wherever it is you live, as I seem to recall.) But it' still a very minority newspaper compared with the bulk of the media sold in Scotland, so still a very necessary corrective. Perhaps unfairly I see it as an insurance policy by the owners of the Herald (daily). TBH I'd much rather have the two combined to get back to something more middle of the road like the old Scotsman of past days before it was wrecked.0 -
Remember the poor Lib Dem PPC in a no hope constituency who became a true believer he was going to win after the 1st debate?antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.
0 -
Very excitable, but I fear all mouth and no money out of their trousers.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.0 -
That's interesting, Nick. It wouldn't surprise me if other MP's/PPC's can relate to your anecdote.NickPalmer said:
I've had some success on the doorstep with people who say we're all lobby fodder and just vote on party lines, I say that I'm prepared to defy the whips if I disagree with them but add "But I'll defy you too if you don't persuade me - I'll listen to you, think about it, discuss it with you, and then either vote as you want or explain why I won't". People are initially taken aback but on the whole they quite like it because it breaks through the miasma of standard replies. I did get one person who said it was my duty to vote as constituents want, regardless of whether I agreed with it - but only one.Pong said:
Who can argue with that? Of course, it's double-speak. What sun readers really want is the perception of honesty from their politicians. The easiest way to achieve that is to stop buying the sun.isam said:
One of the headlines from the sun readers manifesto is that they want less political game playing and more honesty/straight answersisam said:
It's cognitive dissonance.
Like wanting all the paedos locked up while simultaneously sexualising young girls. It's a kind of psychological masochism thing that the sun (and daily mail) exploits very effectively.
I think some people *want* to live in a simple world where politicians (of all colours) are greedy, self serving hypocrites. If people want to believe that, they can find the evidence to justify that belief. I think that mindset turns some into perpetual anti-voters, some into non-voters and others still into the type of people who comment on Zerohedge.
And then there's tap.
The interesting question for me is whether this is a new thing or not. I suspect it is, and I also suspect the dynamic underlying the cynicism/political disengagement is a consequence of the internet
If I had the time, I'd love to do some proper reading into how the printing press changed society - and whether or not there are parallels to be drawn with the internet. My not-very-well-thought-through hypothesis is that the internet has fundamentally changed *everything* - that it's like the impact the printing press had on society back in the 15/16/1700's, but on steroids.
Social change is speeding up and the backlash to this is just beginning to become apparent.
UKIP is one manifestation, ISIS another.0 -
I experienced something for the first time on the tube today, while travelling to work: Two builders, complete with tool boxes, chatting away. Not in English, of Polish, or Latvian, but in French.0
-
Bigot.Theuniondivvie said:
Flashy thinks balance is having a saltire photo-shopped into a swastika on a front page, while lack of balance is having photos of Nazi-saluting, Union flag waving, rioting 'the Rangers' supporters on a front page.Carnyx said:
I didn't concede any point in particular, but you might like to consider how many people had t pay a stupid tax schedule for many years till the SNP got things going in the first place.TGOHF said:
Is there much balance and parity in "The National" ?Carnyx said:[snip]
On the DT, I don't remember anyone on PB pointing out Stephen Daisley's (no great Nat he) hatchet job on its main Scottish star ...
'The issue isn't bias -- that perennial obsession of certain Nationalists who, in symbiotic inversion of the author, see Unionist stooges behind every byline -- for Cochrane is editor and columnist on a paper known for its ardent pro-Union stance. What is objectionable about Cochrane's account of his conduct during the referendum is his open and unabashed disregard for the basic tenets of journalism. He repeatedly refers to the No campaign using the first person plural and it soon becomes clear why.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303773-stephen-daisley-reviews-the-alan-cochrane-referendum-diaries/
And a particulary nice one for PBers
'It’s a pity we can’t fiddle an opinion poll nowadays; the buggers put all their results online.'
'Jenny said I should do what Darling asks. He’s in charge after all. It’s not really good journalism but what the hell does journalism matter? This is much more important.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303682-stephen-daisley-picks-out-the-best-quotes-from-the-alan-cochrane-diaries/
Kudos for conceding the point on the SNP tax retreat though.
The quote are from STV, so you are indulging in whataabootery like a fan of a certain footie team; but now you mention the National, I read both it and the Herald. (How do you know what is in the National, BTW? Electronic sub? It doesn't have a website and I don't suppose there are many paper copies in Essex or wherever it is you live, as I seem to recall.) But it' still a very minority newspaper compared with the bulk of the media sold in Scotland, so still a very necessary corrective. Perhaps unfairly I see it as an insurance policy by the owners of the Herald (daily). TBH I'd much rather have the two combined to get back to something more middle of the road like the old Scotsman of past days before it was wrecked.
0 -
Says a man who has refused bets taking on the Kippers against the ConservativesRichard_Nabavi said:
Very excitable, but I fear all mouth and no money out of their trousers.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.0 -
I do love reading such utter tripe from those with no idea about the Scottish experience.TGOHF said:
Scotslass - as soon as the Autumn statement was announced it was plain that the SNP would have to row back on their tax hammer on the Scottish middle class - the Nats said it was a "non issue" - but now their position has collapsed and Swinney's tail is between his legs.scotslass said:TGOHF
So Swinney "kept quiet" a change that he announced in a parliamentary statement!
It is an evens bet as to whether you know so little about Scottish politics because you just don't like the SNP or alternatively because you believe the total tripe which appears in the Daily Telegraph.
Posters from south of the borde should understand the the Telgraph branch office in Scotland is not just right wing and bigoted like their English colleagues but right wing , bigoted and makes things up. That is to say it is not a real newspaper like the English edition but a propaganda sheet; a plaything of its three or so employees.
Not only that but he has unpatriotically deprived Holyrood of revenue by being undercut by GO - as loyal citizens of Scotland rush to move house whilst under the benign Conservative tax regime and before the pernicious SNP tax hammer comes into force.
These are the facts - pointing them out is not "bigotted"
For at least 50 years, Stamp Duty has been seen as an unfair, broken Slab Tax in need of complete reform. For 50 years successive Westminster governments refused to make any changed.
The Scottish Government changed the system, in a positive, fair way the instant it was transferred to their control. It was tax neutral, with reductions for around 60% of the market, parity for 35% and an increase for the top 5% of the market - so the lies about "middle class" impact are just that, lies.
Not only that, but it was SO GOOD that George Osborne copied it to the letter. Of course with an election coming up, and lacking the popularity of the Scottish government, Osborne decide to bribe the electoral despite the eye-watering deficit that Westminster faces.
In the meantime, Swinney was able to analyse the figures and identify that the Scottish budget was going to benefit with an additional £63m of Barnet consequentials and then reconfigured the bands and rates to maintain its tax neutrality (with a prudent £5m or so kept back in a typically sensible way).
It doesn't matter what those criticising the SNP say. The electoral overwhelmingly back the SNP and their record in government, that's why they have such incredibly approval ratings almost unheard of by a government in power for 7 years.0 -
This is what I fear.Richard_Nabavi said:
Very excitable, but I fear all mouth and no money out of their trousers.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.0 -
Sky poll of polls EICIPM0
-
Yes, no tax rate in the history of the UK has ever been decreased.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.0 -
Yes, I'm a man who doesn't get excitable about bets or ever bet with my heart rather than my head. How about you?isam said:Says a man who has refused bets taking on the Kippers against the Conservatives
0 -
Agree. It will likely end up being a wealth tax. There is no fairness, for instance, in taxing someone who has one £2 mio home and not taxing someone who owns 2 homes worth £1.5 mio each.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.
0 -
Hard evidence belies both of your fears.. Who has more bets/offers more bets on here than me?antifrank said:
This is what I fear.Richard_Nabavi said:
Very excitable, but I fear all mouth and no money out of their trousers.antifrank said:Can I ask the pb public just how excitable they think the kippers will be during the election campaign and how willing they will be to back their excitement with hard cash?
I'm just doing some forward planning.
I'd say Kipper betting money is the largest share on PB0 -
Apart from the 50% top rate? But to be fair that was deliberately set too high out of political malice.Alistair said:
Yes, no tax rate in the history of the UK has ever been decreased.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.0 -
You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made that mistake many times, I am only humanRichard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I'm a man who doesn't get excitable about bets or ever bet with my heart rather than my head. How about you?isam said:Says a man who has refused bets taking on the Kippers against the Conservatives
I have never met a serious gambler who wouldnt say the same, and have been in the business 20 years.. you are a one off!
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.0 -
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?Theuniondivvie said:
Flashy thinks balance is having a saltire photo-shopped into a swastika on a front page, while lack of balance is having photos of Nazi-saluting, Union flag waving, rioting 'the Rangers' supporters on a front page.Carnyx said:
I didn't concede any point in particular, but you might like to consider how many people had t pay a stupid tax schedule for many years till the SNP got things going in the first place.TGOHF said:
Is there much balance and parity in "The National" ?Carnyx said:[snip]
On the DT, I don't remember anyone on PB pointing out Stephen Daisley's (no great Nat he) hatchet job on its main Scottish star ...
'The issue isn't bias -- that perennial obsession of certain Nationalists who, in symbiotic inversion of the author, see Unionist stooges behind every byline -- for Cochrane is editor and columnist on a paper known for its ardent pro-Union stance. What is objectionable about Cochrane's account of his conduct during the referendum is his open and unabashed disregard for the basic tenets of journalism. He repeatedly refers to the No campaign using the first person plural and it soon becomes clear why.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303773-stephen-daisley-reviews-the-alan-cochrane-referendum-diaries/
And a particulary nice one for PBers
'It’s a pity we can’t fiddle an opinion poll nowadays; the buggers put all their results online.'
'Jenny said I should do what Darling asks. He’s in charge after all. It’s not really good journalism but what the hell does journalism matter? This is much more important.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303682-stephen-daisley-picks-out-the-best-quotes-from-the-alan-cochrane-diaries/
Kudos for conceding the point on the SNP tax retreat though.
The quote are from STV, so you are indulging in whataabootery like a fan of a certain footie team; but now you mention the National, I read both it and the Herald. (How do you know what is in the National, BTW? Electronic sub? It doesn't have a website and I don't suppose there are many paper copies in Essex or wherever it is you live, as I seem to recall.) But it' still a very minority newspaper compared with the bulk of the media sold in Scotland, so still a very necessary corrective. Perhaps unfairly I see it as an insurance policy by the owners of the Herald (daily). TBH I'd much rather have the two combined to get back to something more middle of the road like the old Scotsman of past days before it was wrecked.
0 -
I was wrong on Rochester. That's betting.isam said:You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made the mistake many times, I am only human
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.
Most of the bets where I've been wrong in this parliament have been ones where I've backed Labour and they've done worse than I expected.0 -
I don't think a tax has ever been lowered below the rate it was first introduced at.Alistair said:
Yes, no tax rate in the history of the UK has ever been decreased.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.0 -
I think it was sarcasm from Alistair. Look at what Maggie did to the top rate of tax, for another example.saddened said:
Apart from the 50% top rate? But to be fair that was deliberately set to high out of political malice.Alistair said:
Yes, no tax rate in the history of the UK has ever been decreased.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.0 -
Unfortunately for @Antifrank and others, the most generous & optimistic UKIP bettor only bets with the bookies.isam said:
You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made that mistake many times, I am only humanRichard_Nabavi said:
Yes, I'm a man who doesn't get excitable about bets or ever bet with my heart rather than my head. How about you?isam said:Says a man who has refused bets taking on the Kippers against the Conservatives
I have never met a serious gambler who wouldnt say the same, and have been in the business 20 years.. you are a one off!
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.0 -
I bow to your massively greater experience in that area.TGOHF said:
Bigot.Theuniondivvie said:
Flashy thinks balance is having a saltire photo-shopped into a swastika on a front page, while lack of balance is having photos of Nazi-saluting, Union flag waving, rioting 'the Rangers' supporters on a front page.Carnyx said:
I didn't concede any point in particular, but you might like to consider how many people had t pay a stupid tax schedule for many years till the SNP got things going in the first place.TGOHF said:
Is there much balance and parity in "The National" ?Carnyx said:[snip]
On the DT, I don't remember anyone on PB pointing out Stephen Daisley's (no great Nat he) hatchet job on its main Scottish star ...
'The issue isn't bias -- that perennial obsession of certain Nationalists who, in symbiotic inversion of the author, see Unionist stooges behind every byline -- for Cochrane is editor and columnist on a paper known for its ardent pro-Union stance. What is objectionable about Cochrane's account of his conduct during the referendum is his open and unabashed disregard for the basic tenets of journalism. He repeatedly refers to the No campaign using the first person plural and it soon becomes clear why.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303773-stephen-daisley-reviews-the-alan-cochrane-referendum-diaries/
And a particulary nice one for PBers
'It’s a pity we can’t fiddle an opinion poll nowadays; the buggers put all their results online.'
'Jenny said I should do what Darling asks. He’s in charge after all. It’s not really good journalism but what the hell does journalism matter? This is much more important.'
http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/303682-stephen-daisley-picks-out-the-best-quotes-from-the-alan-cochrane-diaries/
Kudos for conceding the point on the SNP tax retreat though.
The quote are from STV, so you are indulging in whataabootery like a fan of a certain footie team; but now you mention the National, I read both it and the Herald. (How do you know what is in the National, BTW? Electronic sub? It doesn't have a website and I don't suppose there are many paper copies in Essex or wherever it is you live, as I seem to recall.) But it' still a very minority newspaper compared with the bulk of the media sold in Scotland, so still a very necessary corrective. Perhaps unfairly I see it as an insurance policy by the owners of the Herald (daily). TBH I'd much rather have the two combined to get back to something more middle of the road like the old Scotsman of past days before it was wrecked.0 -
A friend builds top-end kitchens for footballers wives and the likes. He agreed to do us a mates rates deal on our wonderful kitchen.Anorak said:I experienced something for the first time on the tube today, while travelling to work: Two builders, complete with tool boxes, chatting away. Not in English, of Polish, or Latvian, but in French.
I was slightly surprised, when two of his guys turned up to fit it, to discover they were two young French lads. And they were craftsmen of the highest order.
0 -
I note that according to the ONS, construction output fell in the last three months. That is total nonsense!0
-
Just a smidge.Anorak said:
I think it was sarcasm from Alistair. Look at what Maggie did to the top rate of tax, for another example.saddened said:
Apart from the 50% top rate? But to be fair that was deliberately set to high out of political malice.Alistair said:
Yes, no tax rate in the history of the UK has ever been decreased.FrancisUrquhart said:Re Mansion Tax being ended up levied on all homes...
Of course the "Mansion Tax" will ultimately end up in every bodies home being taxed, it is the way new taxes work. Always introduced as temporary, limited to bashing the rich or a small section of the population, but ultimately just become expanded and expanded.
Think 45/50% tax rate, remember even under Brown, that was introduced as temporary...but now we if we get Labour it will be 50% for the foreseeable future, and if we get the Tories it will be 45%.
Once the rubicon is passed, whenever a government who needs a bit more cash it will be just so easy to lower the threshold of mansion tax (or just not increase it with inflation). Look at council tax, it was introduced as a small charge to pay for essential council services, now for most people it costs more than any of the utilities. In fact, Ed and his cost of living crisis, I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.
Top Rate of tax in 1979: 83%
Top rate of tax in 1988 60%
Top rate of tax in 1989 40%0 -
Did Gordon Brown not reduce IT to 10% on a small band? Whatever happened to that?
Disappointing growth figures this morning although as Max has already pointed out it seems this will be because the ONS have got construction wrong yet again. Still I think the "fastest growing developed economy" boast is now short dated stock. It will be after the election before it is properly corrected.
None of this means that the UK is not still the best performing economy in Europe since 2008 of course. 0.5% is plenty to keep that record going.0 -
I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.
Especially when some consider that all they are receiving in return are a few street lights, a part time, second rate library and having their dustbbins emptied every three weeks.0 -
I remember there being talk of CCTV recordings of the 2 fire starters at the time, and Police Scotland have said that some of the 20 subsequent arrest were due to video footage. Not sure if that's connected, there's been no mention of pending cases.Carnyx said:
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?
0 -
That's quite straightforward. UKIP are committed to leaving the EU, therefore there would be substantial savings on EU membership fees.CarlottaVance said:
Well, it beats explaining where Nigel's £3billion for the NHS is coming from......(that's his job, isn't it?isam said:Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynnmep)
27/01/2015 09:12
Cracking idea for TV debate Cam may go for: Just him with Amjad to represent all other parties, because he has belonged to so many of them!
0 -
But as has already been pointed out below that money has already been spent. It's become the bankers bonus tax of UKIP.Sean_F said:
That's quite straightforward. UKIP are committed to leaving the EU, therefore there would be substantial savings on EU membership fees.CarlottaVance said:
Well, it beats explaining where Nigel's £3billion for the NHS is coming from......(that's his job, isn't it?isam said:Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynnmep)
27/01/2015 09:12
Cracking idea for TV debate Cam may go for: Just him with Amjad to represent all other parties, because he has belonged to so many of them!0 -
There's not that much difference with Germany:DavidL said:Did Gordon Brown not reduce IT to 10% on a small band? Whatever happened to that?
Disappointing growth figures this morning although as Max has already pointed out it seems this will be because the ONS have got construction wrong yet again. Still I think the "fastest growing developed economy" boast is now short dated stock. It will be after the election before it is properly corrected.
None of this means that the UK is not still the best performing economy in Europe since 2008 of course. 0.5% is plenty to keep that record going.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8WN4SaCMAAJIMW.jpg
The real shocker here is just how appallingly Italy is doing.0 -
Idea: excessive leverage causes crises.
How about we have a gross assets tax, at a very small level (say 0.1-25%/year) to discourage people from borrowing too much for 'investment'.
It would also act as a de facto mansion tax, while taxing the person with two £1.5m homes more than someone who had a single £2m home.
Because this would fall disproportionately on the well off, I'd combine this with an abolition of the pointless 45% rate.
(For the record, I would be worse off under this proposal. I propose it as an academic exercise.)0 -
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
0 -
Not very straightforward for the early years of any UKIP government, is it? First we'd have a referendum, secondly, we'd have the period of disentanglement from the EU even if the referendum were won by Out. During this period, the EU membership fees would presumably continue.Sean_F said:
That's quite straightforward. UKIP are committed to leaving the EU, therefore there would be substantial savings on EU membership fees.CarlottaVance said:
Well, it beats explaining where Nigel's £3billion for the NHS is coming from......(that's his job, isn't it?isam said:Patrick O'Flynn (@oflynnmep)
27/01/2015 09:12
Cracking idea for TV debate Cam may go for: Just him with Amjad to represent all other parties, because he has belonged to so many of them!0 -
Mr. F, yes, although the net figure would be more useful.0
-
Nailed on.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was wrong on Rochester. That's betting.isam said:You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made the mistake many times, I am only human
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.
Most of the bets where I've been wrong in this parliament have been ones where I've backed Labour and they've done worse than I expected.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZniqRgw6IQ0 -
No, Germany is very close and France are a lot closer than those who rely on the Telegraph would have you believe as well. The not unimportant difference is that Germany has managed this with almost full employment whilst France has not.antifrank said:
There's not that much difference with Germany:DavidL said:Did Gordon Brown not reduce IT to 10% on a small band? Whatever happened to that?
Disappointing growth figures this morning although as Max has already pointed out it seems this will be because the ONS have got construction wrong yet again. Still I think the "fastest growing developed economy" boast is now short dated stock. It will be after the election before it is properly corrected.
None of this means that the UK is not still the best performing economy in Europe since 2008 of course. 0.5% is plenty to keep that record going.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8WN4SaCMAAJIMW.jpg
The real shocker here is just how appallingly Italy is doing.
Italy is in serious danger. With its level of debt the reduction in the economy has consequences.
Greece is not much short of a tragedy.0 -
Those pointing to income tax rate going down kinda of prove my point. Top rate tax used to be paid by only the very very wealthy, now if you have a middle class job you are more than likely paying 40% (the old "top" rate until Brown's pre-election wheeze). Also, remember NI is now higher too. In the 70's it was 5.5%, now at 12% and I have a suspicious that if Labour get in it will go up again as they appear to want to continue to spend spend spend.
In a mobile world, wealth and consumption taxes are coming, and mansion tax will if introduced be catching more and more people...also remember given Osborne's stamp duty changes, those with big homes are going to get double whammy'ed if Labour get in, if they ever want to move.
0 -
Part of the problem is that the media have been unaccountably coy on the matter. [Edit] Some of them didn;t even mention who was doing the rioting.Theuniondivvie said:
I remember there being talk of CCTV recordings of the 2 fire starters at the time, and Police Scotland have said that some of the 20 subsequent arrest were due to video footage. Not sure if that's connected, there's been no mention of pending cases.Carnyx said:
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?0 -
How are <5 UKIP MP going to get us off of paying EU membership fees?Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.0 -
All the more frustrating that UKIP haven't been clear about which money is going where. I expect that to improve with the manifesto, if it launches as planned?Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
0 -
Ah but the conversation where you and AntiFrank were agreeing with each other was that UKIP bettors don't put their money where their mouths are.. so the result is irrelevant. I did offer you two bets in Rochester, one that you said was value, and another that gave you a 5 point start you didn't put your money where your mouth was.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was wrong on Rochester. That's betting.isam said:You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made the mistake many times, I am only human
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.
Most of the bets where I've been wrong in this parliament have been ones where I've backed Labour and they've done worse than I expected.
I don't mind, its your prerogative but its not right to say Kippers don't back their judgement, implying you do.
There is a long, long list of people who I have offered to let back their judgement and have bottled it on here.. mainly Tories I think0 -
Lol - 'William Faulds, 23, is charged with being in possession of a hammer on September 19 at West Nile Street.'Carnyx said:
Part of the problem is that the media have been unaccountably coy on the matter. [Edit] Some of them didn;t even mention who was doing the rioting.Theuniondivvie said:
I remember there being talk of CCTV recordings of the 2 fire starters at the time, and Police Scotland have said that some of the 20 subsequent arrest were due to video footage. Not sure if that's connected, there's been no mention of pending cases.Carnyx said:
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?
An honest, hardworking chippie caught up unwittingly in a Yes-provoked stramash, nae doot!0 -
Would you impose it on cash savings, shares, pension pots? What about other sources of wealth e.g. interests in businesses or in agricultural land? What about borrowings?rcs1000 said:Idea: excessive leverage causes crises.
How about we have a gross assets tax, at a very small level (say 0.1-25%/year) to discourage people from borrowing too much for 'investment'.
It would also act as a de facto mansion tax, while taxing the person with two £1.5m homes more than someone who had a single £2m home.
Because this would fall disproportionately on the well off, I'd combine this with an abolition of the pointless 45% rate.
(For the record, I would be worse off under this proposal. I propose it as an academic exercise.)
I think that if any wealth tax is imposed it will be in addition to not instead of any existing tax.
0 -
You bottled one of mine.isam said:
Ah but the conversation where you and AntiFrank were agreeing with each other was that UKIP bettors don't put their money where their mouths are.. so the result is irrelevant. I did offer you two bets in Rochester, one that you said was value, and another that gave you a 5 point start you didn't put your money where your mouth was.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was wrong on Rochester. That's betting.isam said:You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made the mistake many times, I am only human
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.
Most of the bets where I've been wrong in this parliament have been ones where I've backed Labour and they've done worse than I expected.
I don't mind, its your prerogative but its not right to say Kippers don't back their judgement, implying you do.
There is a long, long list of people who I have offered to let back their judgement and have bottled it on here.. mainly Tories I think0 -
Oh I thought manifestos were to outline what a party would do if they were in government?saddened said:
How are <5 UKIP MP going to get us off of paying EU membership fees?</p>Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
Are you saying they should be to outline what they'd do if they got 5 MP's or less?0 -
Nice sentiment, but I'm afraid it isn't adequate. Votes don't come with big neon signs saying BAD ILLIBERAL LEGISLATION or UNJUST UNNECESSARY WAR attached to them -More often than not it won't be just the whips behind them, it will be media pressure and a chattering class consensus, along with great sounding arguments about the public good. There will always be sufficient justification at the time to vote for anything and then say years down the line 'I was wrong to vote for Iraq'.NickPalmer said:
I've had some success on the doorstep with people who say we're all lobby fodder and just vote on party lines, I say that I'm prepared to defy the whips if I disagree with them but add "But I'll defy you too if you don't persuade me - I'll listen to you, think about it, discuss it with you, and then either vote as you want or explain why I won't". People are initially taken aback but on the whole they quite like it because it breaks through the miasma of standard replies. I did get one person who said it was my duty to vote as constituents want, regardless of whether I agreed with it - but only one.Pong said:
Who can argue with that? Of course, it's double-speak. What sun readers really want is the perception of honesty from their politicians. The easiest way to achieve that is to stop buying the sun.isam said:
One of the headlines from the sun readers manifesto is that they want less political game playing and more honesty/straight answersisam said:
It's cognitive dissonance.
Like wanting all the paedos locked up while simultaneously sexualising young girls. It's a kind of psychological masochism thing that the sun (and daily mail) exploits very effectively.0 -
It's perfectly feasible, as is the idea of changing the UK tax system from an income to an assets base. Kay and King devoted a chunk of their excellent book to just such an idea:Cyclefree said:
Would you impose it on cash savings, shares, pension pots? What about other sources of wealth e.g. interests in businesses or in agricultural land? What about borrowings?rcs1000 said:Idea: excessive leverage causes crises.
How about we have a gross assets tax, at a very small level (say 0.1-25%/year) to discourage people from borrowing too much for 'investment'.
It would also act as a de facto mansion tax, while taxing the person with two £1.5m homes more than someone who had a single £2m home.
Because this would fall disproportionately on the well off, I'd combine this with an abolition of the pointless 45% rate.
(For the record, I would be worse off under this proposal. I propose it as an academic exercise.)
I think that if any wealth tax is imposed it will be in addition to not instead of any existing tax.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-British-Tax-System-J-A/dp/019828313X
Unfortunately, it is politically unacceptable so we we will never see it put into practice, except perhaps in minor and irrelevant manifestations such as the Mansion Tax.
PS I take it you missed my tip yesterday? Happily a number of other PBers profited but it was given directly to you so a pity if you didn't spot it.0 -
ICM Unlimited @ICMResearch · 18m18 minutes ago
"How accurate is accurate in political polling?" asks @martinboon http://ow.ly/I0BET #mrx #GE15 @researchlive
0 -
Did I? What was it?logical_song said:
You bottled one of mine.isam said:
Ah but the conversation where you and AntiFrank were agreeing with each other was that UKIP bettors don't put their money where their mouths are.. so the result is irrelevant. I did offer you two bets in Rochester, one that you said was value, and another that gave you a 5 point start you didn't put your money where your mouth was.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was wrong on Rochester. That's betting.isam said:You're a better man than I. Unfortunately I have made the mistake many times, I am only human
I remember you saying the Cons were massive value in Rochester at 7/2 and when I said I was offering 7/2 on Betfair and you could have it, you said no.
Most of the bets where I've been wrong in this parliament have been ones where I've backed Labour and they've done worse than I expected.
I don't mind, its your prerogative but its not right to say Kippers don't back their judgement, implying you do.
There is a long, long list of people who I have offered to let back their judgement and have bottled it on here.. mainly Tories I think
I made a call on something and said no when I was offered a bet to back it up? I don't believe that0 -
Sub Judice may come into it, the two girls who were pictured holding up the Saltire in defiance of the flag burning Unionist bigots on 19th September were only able to speak out yesterday because they were arrested and referred to the fiscal by the police.Carnyx said:
Part of the problem is that the media have been unaccountably coy on the matter. [Edit] Some of them didn;t even mention who was doing the rioting.Theuniondivvie said:
I remember there being talk of CCTV recordings of the 2 fire starters at the time, and Police Scotland have said that some of the 20 subsequent arrest were due to video footage. Not sure if that's connected, there's been no mention of pending cases.Carnyx said:
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?
I'd like to say "unbelievably arrested and referred" but in the UK, it's perfectly believable.0 -
Ah, happy memories of September 19. That reminds me, I don't remember seeing any further reports on the fire that night affecting the only (then) pro-indy newspaper in Scotland. Did you ever see anything?
Was it not found out fairly shortly after that the cause of the fire, which as you try and imply affected the Sunday Herald (but presumably not the pro-Union Herald based in the same building), was an electrical fault at a nearby pub?0 -
We both know that UKIP can promise a unicorn in every garage and unlimited wealth to all. They are never going to have to back it up. It's the primary reason farage does well in debates he can spout populist bollocks and never get called on it to the point where he called his own manifesto crap. The libdems used to do exactly the same up until the point they screwed up and got into government, which didn't turn out well.isam said:
Oh I thought manifestos were to outline what a party would do if they were in government?saddened said:
How are <5 UKIP MP going to get us off of paying EU membership fees?</p>Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
Are you saying they should be to outline what they'd do if they got 5 MP's or less?0 -
But the point you made was nonsense.. by your logic, parties that aren't going to win power in elections shouldn't bother with manifestossaddened said:
We both know that UKIP can promise a unicorn in every garage and unlimited wealth to all. They are never going to have to back it up. It's the primary reason farage does well in debates he can spout populist bollocks and never get called on it to the point where he called his own manifesto crap. The libdems used to do exactly the same up until the point they screwed up and got into government, which didn't turn out well.isam said:
Oh I thought manifestos were to outline what a party would do if they were in government?saddened said:
How are <5 UKIP MP going to get us off of paying EU membership fees?</p>Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
Are you saying they should be to outline what they'd do if they got 5 MP's or less?0 -
Labour majority going to the moon on BF...
9.60 -
The point is UKIP don't bother with manifestos, what they churn out are pointless pie in the sky lists of crap, as so eloquently pointed out by your leader.isam said:
But the point you made was nonsense.. by your logic, parties that aren't going to win power in elections shouldn't bother with manifestossaddened said:
We both know that UKIP can promise a unicorn in every garage and unlimited wealth to all. They are never going to have to back it up. It's the primary reason farage does well in debates he can spout populist bollocks and never get called on it to the point where he called his own manifesto crap. The libdems used to do exactly the same up until the point they screwed up and got into government, which didn't turn out well.isam said:
Oh I thought manifestos were to outline what a party would do if they were in government?saddened said:
How are <5 UKIP MP going to get us off of paying EU membership fees?</p>Sean_F said:
Overseas aid and gross EU membership fees total £27bn p.a. That's a lot of money to play with.CarlottaVance said:
So no tax cuts or increased personal allowances as promised by O'Flynn at the conference then?isam said:
Mark Reckless @MarkReckless · 11m11 minutes agoScott_P said:
@iainmartin1: UKIP to fund £3bn for NHS "partly by clawing back money from health tourists." That old standby, from list headed "magic sources of money"CarlottaVance said:Has O'Flynn explained yet where Nigel's NHS £3billion is coming from? Or does he limit himself to talking about their former MEP who they reckoned was a baddun 7 months ago?
@iainmartin1 It is £5bn more for NHS, £3bn from EU budget plus £2bn by requiring new migrants to take out NHS-approved insurance for 5 years
Brave - 'We're scrapping tax cuts in favour of NHS spending'
Welcome to the world of hard choices.
Are you saying they should be to outline what they'd do if they got 5 MP's or less?0 -
Yes, but think of all the lucky staff they're keeping in style at County Halls across the UK.peter_from_putney said:I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.
Especially when some consider that all they are receiving in return are a few street lights, a part time, second rate library and having their dustbbins emptied every three weeks.0 -
And there's £689 seeking to back "TOM" at 6.8.RodCrosby said:Labour majority going to the moon on BF...
9.6
The next few days polls could be crucial. For the Tories to get an overall majority they, obviously, need to start improving their share of the vote. If they can establish themselves as being ahead in the polls, albeit by a small amount, the extra votes may follow.
Momentum is your friend.
0 -
@politicshome: Ed Balls rules out Labour coalition with the SNP - read on here...http://t.co/w3JsNVgFBT http://t.co/u65zksj9mA0
-
Scott_P said:
@politicshome: Ed Balls rules out Labour coalition with the SNP - read on here...http://t.co/w3JsNVgFBT http://t.co/u65zksj9mA
"No".
"I don’t think anybody is suggesting any suggestion of a deal with the SNP at all, we’re fighting hard for a majority," he said.0 -
@IanDunt: Minority rule: Labour all but rules out SNP coalition http://t.co/5h6wE61qM7 http://t.co/h734xPUHzy0
-
It doesn't exactly sound like a categorical denial to me. More a "pre-election we're not talking about such things" denial.Pulpstar said:Scott_P said:@politicshome: Ed Balls rules out Labour coalition with the SNP - read on here...http://t.co/w3JsNVgFBT http://t.co/u65zksj9mA
"No".
"I don’t think anybody is suggesting any suggestion of a deal with the SNP at all, we’re fighting hard for a majority," he said.0 -
Worst news to come out this gaming generation. The best game of last gen, Dragon's Dogma, is going to turn into a horrible MMO style free to play piece of crap. Horrible.0
-
I'm so sorry. I did miss it. I shall pay more attention next time. Sorry!! (But thanks.)Peter_the_Punter said:
It's perfectly feasible, as is the idea of changing the UK tax system from an income to an assets base. Kay and King devoted a chunk of their excellent book to just such an idea:Cyclefree said:
Would you impose it on cash savings, shares, pension pots? What about other sources of wealth e.g. interests in businesses or in agricultural land? What about borrowings?rcs1000 said:Idea: excessive leverage causes crises.
How about we have a gross assets tax, at a very small level (say 0.1-25%/year) to discourage people from borrowing too much for 'investment'.
It would also act as a de facto mansion tax, while taxing the person with two £1.5m homes more than someone who had a single £2m home.
Because this would fall disproportionately on the well off, I'd combine this with an abolition of the pointless 45% rate.
(For the record, I would be worse off under this proposal. I propose it as an academic exercise.)
I think that if any wealth tax is imposed it will be in addition to not instead of any existing tax.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-British-Tax-System-J-A/dp/019828313X
Unfortunately, it is politically unacceptable so we we will never see it put into practice, except perhaps in minor and irrelevant manifestations such as the Mansion Tax.
PS I take it you missed my tip yesterday? Happily a number of other PBers profited but it was given directly to you so a pity if you didn't spot it.
Once I get past the stinking cold I'm suffering from my thoughts will turn to more interesting racing matters. Are you planning a visit to Cheltenham?
0 -
I was speaking generally. You certainly put your money where your mouth is, sometimes too much so for your own good! I seem to recall that you will owe me something when Labour fail to put an EU referendum in their manifesto.isam said:I don't mind, its your prerogative but its not right to say Kippers don't back their judgement, implying you do.
There is a long, long list of people who I have offered to let back their judgement and have bottled it on here.. mainly Tories I think
As for bottling, the biggest example of all mouth and no trousers here are the Kippers who tediously and ludicrously whinge that Cameron can't be trusted to keep his pledge to hold the referendum by the end of 2017, if he has a majority. I've searched high and low to find a credit-worthy Kipper who's prepared to back this nonsense, in the hope of taking some money off them, but sadly I haven't yet found one mug enough to take the bet. It doesn't stop them repeating the nonsense, though.0 -
Yes, I am planning a visit to Cheltenham, in much the same way as the Pope is planning an Easter Mass. Any chance of seeing you there?Cyclefree said:
I'm so sorry. I did miss it. I shall pay more attention next time. Sorry!! (But thanks.)Peter_the_Punter said:
It's perfectly feasible, as is the idea of changing the UK tax system from an income to an assets base. Kay and King devoted a chunk of their excellent book to just such an idea:Cyclefree said:
Would you impose it on cash savings, shares, pension pots? What about other sources of wealth e.g. interests in businesses or in agricultural land? What about borrowings?rcs1000 said:Idea: excessive leverage causes crises.
How about we have a gross assets tax, at a very small level (say 0.1-25%/year) to discourage people from borrowing too much for 'investment'.
It would also act as a de facto mansion tax, while taxing the person with two £1.5m homes more than someone who had a single £2m home.
Because this would fall disproportionately on the well off, I'd combine this with an abolition of the pointless 45% rate.
(For the record, I would be worse off under this proposal. I propose it as an academic exercise.)
I think that if any wealth tax is imposed it will be in addition to not instead of any existing tax.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-British-Tax-System-J-A/dp/019828313X
Unfortunately, it is politically unacceptable so we we will never see it put into practice, except perhaps in minor and irrelevant manifestations such as the Mansion Tax.
PS I take it you missed my tip yesterday? Happily a number of other PBers profited but it was given directly to you so a pity if you didn't spot it.
Once I get past the stinking cold I'm suffering from my thoughts will turn to more interesting racing matters. Are you planning a visit to Cheltenham?
Wish you better.0 -
As well as education for themselves, their children and/or their grandchildren, care for them or their elderly relatives and someone to call if they set their house on fire.TheWatcher said:
Yes, but think of all the lucky staff they're keeping in style at County Halls across the UK.peter_from_putney said:I know a lot of people whose life could be made a hell of a lot easier if the council wasn't taking £1500-2000 a year off them.
Especially when some consider that all they are receiving in return are a few street lights, a part time, second rate library and having their dustbbins emptied every three weeks.
Quite apart from a book or two or read and free Internet down the Library.
0 -
Mr. Max, Capcom must be off their bloody heads.
Dragon's Dogma had a few flaws (generic world and a storyline that went missing for the middle) but it was universally praised for its fantastic combat. If they'd sorted the story and made a more distinctive world for the sequel it'd be a serious rival to The Elder Scrolls.
The Elder Scrolls, of course, just dropped the subscription to their MMORPG, which has been more criticised than praised.
Capcom are about a decade and a half late. This is a very disappointing decision.0 -
I can't see the SNP entering a coalition anyway, so it's academic. Confidence & Supply, or more likely a blackmailing 'we'll support you for the moment if you behave, wee Eddie' is another matter, of course.antifrank said:It doesn't exactly sound like a categorical denial to me. More a "pre-election we're not talking about such things" denial.
0 -
Looks to me like Ed Balls is trying to secure Labour most seats there.0
