politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Three months to go and focus moves to what should be good f

another_richard said:

DavidL said:

I have no love for UKIP and my assessment of Farage is not really suitable for a family site but that farce in Rotherham today is frankly unacceptable.

I am bewildered that SYP have not been completely disbanded yet. They are a national embarrassment and now they are willing to tolerate the cancellation of the democratic process because doing even one part of their job is apparently too much trouble. Other than boosting the local community with their generous pensions and payoffs what are they for?

Being a Conservative I suggest you ask Home Secretary Theresa May and Police Minister Mike Penning that.

If you google Mike Penning South Yorkshire police Rotherham you get:

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=uA_VVI-FFNfCVMWGgoAM&gws_rd=ssl#q=mike+penning+south+yorkshire+police+rotherham

Been active hasn't he !!! The third link provided, at least to me, is to a comment I posted at UKPR.

And for Theresa May:

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=uA_VVI-FFNfCVMWGgoAM&gws_rd=ssl#q=theresa+may+south+yorkshire+police+rotherham

Most recent link is from 16th September.

Wales 5 minutes late coming out at the start is as nothing to the 2nd half, where there is no sign of them showing up at all.

Not England's night I fear. I cannot say I was aware of the two phases rule, but if that is right then an incorrect call.

Flightpath said:

Dair says -- ''The UK is not "my country". And even if it were, I fail to see how tokenistic power projection has any bearing on one's "love" for country.''

I see what you did there - although it may be that you are as pig ignorant as you sound. A total misrepresentation of the facts motives and outcomes is not uncommon even on here, but you take the biscuit.
The UK is not a backwarter
The UK is not engaged in tokenism
The UK is not engaged in power projection - which I take to mean selfish domination.

I see very little wrong with admiration of one's country for its selfless activities in supporting its NATO and UN treaty obligations which are primarily involved either bringing or supporting democracy to those parts of the world which need it.

I doubt our actions are selfless - that would be a very bizarre thing in foreign relations - but I would agree with you three main points. That we engage in powerplay games like any other nation does not mean the arguments on each side are equal, or that ours are automatically worse. In fact they may be better.

kle4 said:

Not England's night I fear. I cannot say I was aware of the two phases rule, but if that is right then an incorrect call.

Eh ?

We've won !

Good second half display from England, proved me wrong.

Speaking as a Scot that English pack is truly frightening.

So the England try that was disallowed for the really obvious crossing.

The Betfair market went from Wales 3.5 to 13.5 until it was chalked off. If you had brass balls there was a unbelievable amount of "risk free" money to be made.

SeanT said:

Excellent victory for England. Terrific game of rugby.

Very good sean - lol

That second half was peak England

Like watching Goliath smash up David.

In the Times tomorrow, Andy Burnham says Starbucks, Google & Amazon have damaged the fabric of our life

As a betting note, england are almost always too short odds in a comp due to population size difference and patriotic betting.


(France available at 13/2 to win 6 nations)

So where does the march on Moscow proving to be a complete waste of time leave the BBC story that Cameron is weak and pointless that they have been running so enthusiastically all day? I find it a bit weird that Merkel and Hollande would run off like that without any clear indication of what they were going to get before they arrive. Amateurish. Bit like Ed really.

I am not a fan of pouring petrol on fires or weapons into war zones but surely providing the Ukrainians with some equivalent kit is the next step.

TheScreamingEagles said:

In the Times tomorrow, Andy Burnham says Starbucks, Google & Amazon have damaged the fabric of our life

Christ,what's happening with labour,every time they open the mouths,putting foot in it.

Flightpath said:

Dair says -- ''The UK is not "my country". And even if it were, I fail to see how tokenistic power projection has any bearing on one's "love" for country.''

I see what you did there - although it may be that you are as pig ignorant as you sound. A total misrepresentation of the facts motives and outcomes is not uncommon even on here, but you take the biscuit.
The UK is not a backwarter
The UK is not engaged in tokenism
The UK is not engaged in power projection - which I take to mean selfish domination.

I see very little wrong with admiration of one's country for its selfless activities in supporting its NATO and UN treaty obligations which are primarily involved either bringing or supporting democracy to those parts of the world which need it.

There is nothing wrong with accepting that one's country is a backwater. In many ways it is far preferable, removing the terrorist target which the UK insists on painting on it's back. But backwater it is, it is not the UK which is leading negotiations in Moscow, the leader in Europe is Germany, followed by France, in fact the UK refuses to accept any real role in Europe due to the infectious disease of base xenophobic racism which pervades vast swathes of the nation.

Power projection is the ability for a country to exert military influence outside that of a narrow Home Defense role. The UK is sorely lacking in this role, the utter embarrassment of the failed Helmand operations demonstrate just how ill-equipped and ill-suited the British Army is to any sort of functional role in military operations.

This is a country with a single squadron of Generation 6 Fighter Aircraft and with no Generation 6 Air Superiority platform. Without a single Fast Jet operational Aircraft Carrier. With no operational strategic bomber capability and a woefully outdated tactical bomber capability. Does the standard issue rifle even work yet?

The UK has had no role I can think of in international relations in the last 20 years. It doesn't lead, it follows the US and does so on a much weaker and ineffectual basis.

Love the UK if you wish. But seriously, try to be at least a bit realistic of where the country stands in the world today and what influence and capability it actually has.

As one who was brought up to support Wales, the last two games I've watched, Wales have lost. The one I started to watch and had to give up we won.

The lesson is clear!

Smarmeron said:

@TheScreamingEagles
Pretty much true, our culture is now one of sharp practice and greed.
We lost Honour and Duty on the way here, and they though are sorely missed, they did die valiantly, if that helps?

Smarmeron said:

@TheScreamingEagles
Pretty much true, our culture is now one of sharp practice and greed.
We lost Honour and Duty on the way here, and they though are sorely missed, they did die valiantly, if that helps?

You seem to be missing the Glorious days of the seventies ;-)

DavidL said:

Speaking as a Scot that English pack is truly frightening.

Wait until that 23st prop comes on as a sub for France tomorrow.

___Bobajob___ said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Times have also done an interview with Tristram Hunt (prior to his Nuns thing)

Headline is Tristram Hunt: Labour’s next leader?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/magazine/article4342894.ece

Nobody cares about Nungate – an utter irrelevance everywhere except on PB

It's not just nungate,it's a build up of crap coming out of lot's of labour figures.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Times have also done an interview with Tristram Hunt (prior to his Nuns thing)

Headline is Tristram Hunt: Labour’s next leader?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/magazine/article4342894.ece

Lol.

No.

TheScreamingEagles said:

In the Times tomorrow, Andy Burnham says Starbucks, Google & Amazon have damaged the fabric of our life

No, I think it was the flying shuttle.

TheScreamingEagles said:

The full Burnham quote

Corporate tax avoidance has become a major issue for voters, he believes. “People are really angry about the sense that these companies are not paying their way. Starbucks, Google, Amazon and the rest . . . are damaging our town centres and the fabric of our life but they are not contributing to repair that damage. It’s a moral question.”

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't GO done more on this than 13 years of Labour?

WTF is Miliband doing with his letter about tax havens? Is he trying to drive the last business out of Britain? I know it is playing to his anti-business theme - but it is a dangerous, dangerous path.

http://metro.co.uk/2015/02/06/company-offers-employees-annual-bonus-of-a-night-with-a-porn-star-5051689/

@oxfordsimon
Stand up to Putin, and back down to business? Thinking about it, business doesn't have nukes.(or at least not as many as the Russians)?
;-)

'David Cameron's NHS shake-up has wasted BILLIONS and made the NHS worse'

Well i would never have thought that!!!

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The full Burnham quote

Corporate tax avoidance has become a major issue for voters, he believes. “People are really angry about the sense that these companies are not paying their way. Starbucks, Google, Amazon and the rest . . . are damaging our town centres and the fabric of our life but they are not contributing to repair that damage. It’s a moral question.”

I don't really see how Starbucks could be accused of damaging our town centres. Granted I personally think there are too many coffee joints in places now, and I don't know how they stay in business - tax avoidance I guess - but they seem about the only things that do well in a lot of town centres in these parts, so more Starbucks is just part of what town centres are now.

That said, a yawn worthy quote. He's right people are angry about such things, when they see vast companies claim they do not pay tax because they don't make profit, or barely any, despite thousands of stores and years of operation, thanks to clever accounting, but politicians banging on about it is as dull as dishwater. They all do it, they all say it is wrong to one degree or another, and they will do something about it. It's the low hanging fruit of political topics.

Actually Starbucks isn't doing anywhere near as well as people think or they hoped when they came to the UK. Costa is winning the battle hands down for being THE coffee outlet in the UK.

Tykejohnno said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

In the Times tomorrow, Andy Burnham says Starbucks, Google & Amazon have damaged the fabric of our life

Christ,what's happening with labour,every time they open the mouths,putting foot in it.

You do realize all this "anti business" stuff is playing brilliantly on the left?

FrancisUrquhart said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The full Burnham quote

Corporate tax avoidance has become a major issue for voters, he believes. “People are really angry about the sense that these companies are not paying their way. Starbucks, Google, Amazon and the rest . . . are damaging our town centres and the fabric of our life but they are not contributing to repair that damage. It’s a moral question.”

I don't really see how Starbucks could be accused of damaging our town centres. Granted I personally think there are too many coffee joints in places now, and I don't know how they stay in business - tax avoidance I guess - but they seem about the only things that do well in a lot of town centres in these parts, so more Starbucks is just part of what town centres are now.

That said, a yawn worthy quote. He's right people are angry about such things, when they see vast companies claim they do not pay tax because they don't make profit, or barely any, despite thousands of stores and years of operation, thanks to clever accounting, but politicians banging on about it is as dull as dishwater. They all do it, they all say it is wrong to one degree or another, and they will do something about it. It's the low hanging fruit of political topics.

Actually Starbucks isn't doing anywhere near as well as people think or they hoped when they came to the UK. Costa is winning the battle hands down for being THE coffee outlet in the UK.

I can believe that, I don't see nearly as many Starbucks as I do Costas, purely from an anecdotal perspective. I don't believe they have made as little money from it as they claim though, or that it would take as long as they said it would to do so, given how many years and how many stores they operated. It's one step removed from Hollywood Accounting.

So I'm not against people bashing them and other companies for it, acknowledging their may well be consequences to trying to make them pay anyway near a fair amount of tax, but anyone trying to score partisan political points from it wins no points from me, as on that at least, the parties really are playing to same basic hymn sheet.

oxfordsimon said:

WTF is Miliband doing with his letter about tax havens? Is he trying to drive the last business out of Britain? I know it is playing to his anti-business theme - but it is a dangerous, dangerous path.

Personally if I was starting a business I wouldn't want to be competing with people who could undercut my by using tax havens to reduce their costs.

nigel4england said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The full Burnham quote

Corporate tax avoidance has become a major issue for voters, he believes. “People are really angry about the sense that these companies are not paying their way. Starbucks, Google, Amazon and the rest . . . are damaging our town centres and the fabric of our life but they are not contributing to repair that damage. It’s a moral question.”

Best leave the single market then.

This is nothing to do with the single market, the single market it just Mae's it slightly easier to select a intermediary tax haven, they all ultimately get channelled to Caribbean tax havens.

There's a killer quote from the Starbucks chief exec where he boasts about the UK being superproffitable on the investor conference call in a year where the UK accounts show a "loss"

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

kle4 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The full Burnham quote

Corporate tax avoidance has become a major issue for voters, he believes. “People are really angry about the sense that these companies are not paying their way. Starbucks, Google, Amazon and the rest . . . are damaging our town centres and the fabric of our life but they are not contributing to repair that damage. It’s a moral question.”

I don't really see how Starbucks could be accused of damaging our town centres. Granted I personally think there are too many coffee joints in places now, and I don't know how they stay in business - tax avoidance I guess - but they seem about the only things that do well in a lot of town centres in these parts, so more Starbucks is just part of what town centres are now.

That said, a yawn worthy quote. He's right people are angry about such things, when they see vast companies claim they do not pay tax because they don't make profit, or barely any, despite thousands of stores and years of operation, thanks to clever accounting, but politicians banging on about it is as dull as dishwater. They all do it, they all say it is wrong to one degree or another, and they will do something about it. It's the low hanging fruit of political topics.

Actually Starbucks isn't doing anywhere near as well as people think or they hoped when they came to the UK. Costa is winning the battle hands down for being THE coffee outlet in the UK.

I can believe that, I don't see nearly as many Starbucks as I do Costas, purely from an anecdotal perspective. I don't believe they have made as little money from it as they claim though, or that it would take as long as they said it would to do so, given how many years and how many stores they operated. It's one step removed from Hollywood Accounting.

So I'm not against people bashing them and other companies for it, acknowledging their may well be consequences to trying to make them pay anyway near a fair amount of tax, but anyone trying to score partisan political points from it wins no points from me, as on that at least, the parties really are playing to same basic hymn sheet.

Oh don't get me wrong, Starbucks still have a good racket going with their transfer pricing, just saying they aren't doing nearly as well as people think.

I know that Costa is owned by UK company Whitbread, and I have no idea about their tax arrangements.

Alistair said:

Tykejohnno said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

In the Times tomorrow, Andy Burnham says Starbucks, Google & Amazon have damaged the fabric of our life

Christ,what's happening with labour,every time they open the mouths,putting foot in it.

You do realize all this "anti business" stuff is playing brilliantly on the left?

Yep,core vote strategy.

DavidL said:

___Bobajob___ said:

DavidL said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

Speaking as a Scot that English pack is truly frightening.

Wait until that 23st prop comes on as a sub for France tomorrow.

I know, modern international rugby is ridiculous. No wonder modern players spend so much time injured.

Right. A team weight limit is required asap – the arms race over pack weights needs sorting.

It is a good idea if the game is going to survive in anything like its traditional form.

The transition of Rugby Union to being indistinguishable from Rugby League is an inevitable outcome of professionalism. They can keep postponing it with fudges and rule changes but at some point the inevitability of uncontested scrums and play the balls will happen.

dugarbandier said:

___Bobajob___ said:

DavidL said:

___Bobajob___ said:

DavidL said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

Speaking as a Scot that English pack is truly frightening.

Wait until that 23st prop comes on as a sub for France tomorrow.

I know, modern international rugby is ridiculous. No wonder modern players spend so much time injured.

Right. A team weight limit is required asap – the arms race over pack weights needs sorting.

It is a good idea if the game is going to survive in anything like its traditional form.

I remember having an argument on here about this with one poster saying it was impossible to impose. The debate foundered when it was pointed out that boxing and other fighting sports have managed to regulate weights without problem. It needs to happen.

have you seen those books/articles by yon French bloke and Paul Kimmage? performance enhancement ahoy, so they say

The rugby establishments blase attitude about drugs is going to result in a massive scandal. The testing procedures in rugby are pathetic.

DavidL said:

Smarmeron said:

DavidL
Rugby will probably mate with American Football, and they will have a very ugly child.

Apparently the average career at the top of American football is about 3 years due to injuries, and they wear armour and crash helmets.

I played American Football at uni. I can tell you that the armour is necessary. I've played rugby too, but only been taken off the field in a ambulance in one, armour or no.

DavidL said:

Smarmeron said:

DavidL
Rugby will probably mate with American Football, and they will have a very ugly child.

Apparently the average career at the top of American football is about 3 years due to injuries, and they wear armour and crash helmets.

Surely that is part of the issue, as armour and helmets allow them to throw more force at each other.

Dair said:

DavidL said:

___Bobajob___ said:

DavidL said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

Speaking as a Scot that English pack is truly frightening.

Wait until that 23st prop comes on as a sub for France tomorrow.

I know, modern international rugby is ridiculous. No wonder modern players spend so much time injured.

Right. A team weight limit is required asap – the arms race over pack weights needs sorting.

It is a good idea if the game is going to survive in anything like its traditional form.

The transition of Rugby Union to being indistinguishable from Rugby League is an inevitable outcome of professionalism. They can keep postponing it with fudges and rule changes but at some point the inevitability of uncontested scrums and play the balls will happen.

As long as they don't have the six tackles rule, or whatever its called, it should be ok. Though I never understood why, if the scrums are to be uncontested, you don't just restart play some other way - you're just making 4 people bend over and lock arms for no reason.

@DavidL
The evolution of AF makes fascinating reading for much the same reasons.
The banning of the "flying V offence" on the grounds that it was killing too many people?