politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON to LAB swing in 40 key marginals moves to 4.5% accordin
Comments
-
Absolutely right and indeed it's already happening (and is referred to) in the Stephen Fisher model - every week from hereon is key!Pulpstar said:These seat models are all going to start heading Labour's way fairly soon if the polls don't start swinging back alot more than they have.
0 -
Scenario Probability
Hung Parliament 0.91
Labour Majority 0.07
Conservative Majority 0.02
Election forecast
Scenario Probability
Conservative Plurality 0.51
Labour Plurality 0.480 -
So I understand but there is no coming back from Ed will NEVER be PM if EICIPMGIN1138 said:
The ARSE has a good record (as does Rod Crosby) but as each day goes by without the Tories showing any real indication of recovery, it becomes harder to see quite where the votes are coming from to keep Cam in Downing Street.bigjohnowls said:Jacks ARSE disagrees
Wonder who will be proved right either myself or JackW
Obviously a Conservative majority is out of question (but was always highly unlikely) but at this rate you struggle to see beyond Lab largest party or a tiny Labour majority.
Or vice versa of course
0 -
I agree with your Conservative seat forecast but have decided to take £9 of Lab Maj at 17.0 and £6 of Lab Minority @ 7.26 today.peter_from_putney said:
Absolutely right and indeed it's already happening (and is referred to) in the Stephen Fisher model - every week from hereon is key!Pulpstar said:These seat models are all going to start heading Labour's way fairly soon if the polls don't start swinging back alot more than they have.
0 -
Latest still assumes quite a bit of swingback making plurality a toss up (LAB 2.3 Betfair)peter_from_putney said:
Absolutely right and indeed it's already happening (and is referred to) in the Stephen Fisher model - every week from hereon is key!Pulpstar said:These seat models are all going to start heading Labour's way fairly soon if the polls don't start swinging back alot more than they have.
http://electionsetc.com/2015/02/13/forecast-update-13-february-2015/0 -
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
0 -
Thing what the models aren't factoring in is that I really don't think the press have anything left. What more can they throw at Ed?
If anything they will be giving him a boost like the Sun did with Brown.
I submit the Tories would have had a majority if the sun hadn't gone for Gordon over a dead service man.0 -
You've missed my point, Mike. They need to be doing badly in these seats; it would indicate that more of their voters are concentrated where it matters.MikeSmithson said:
It's totally irrelevant. Votes in seats where you are not in contention matter not. Votes where you are mean everything. You've get to get out of this vote shares fetish.Tissue_Price said:
That's not good news for them, is it?antifrank said:
That's not too far out of line with what Lord Ashcroft has found. In his constituency polls on average, the Lib Dems are averaging around 6.5% or so (south of the border) in seats where they are not in contention:Pulpstar said:Lib Dems on 8% looks... high.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/missing-presumed-red-2010-lib-dems.html0 -
0
-
More like three, John.bigjohnowls said:
Whoever governs will not have much room for manoeuvre until 2018, at best.
Btw, comparisons with Jack's ARSE are odious. You simply feed poll findings into an automatic calculator. His projections are based on careful sampling, judicious weighting, skill, experience, and copious amounts of best malt whisky.
I'm afraid you cannot hope to compete.0 -
What on earth are Betfair doing with their Labour odds for Thurrock:
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/thurrock/winning-party/bet-history/labour/today
0 -
There will be a serious risk of the Winter of Discontent from 78/9 being rerun, but much worse. The unions would be demanding their pounds of flesh, which there's no money to pay for and it will be topped up by England being ruled by Scottish minority votes.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
All potentially with weak Ed in charge.
Horrific prospect.0 -
I think people feel austerity will be done fairer under LAB and that now is no time to cut so deep to generate money for tax cuts.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
Anyway could still go either way in my view.
But EICIPM is not a 2.40 shot IMO (I reckon about 183 would be about right)0 -
Is Socrates banned for raising Rotherham? If so that is terriblebigjohnowls said:
Presumably Socrates still banned tooPulpstar said:
Suggestions that Uncle Vince is going to lose his seat are verbotenPeter_the_Punter said:
I think she peed off OGH once too often.Ishmael_X said:
Was audrey warned off, or is she just busy with her algorithms?Peter_the_Punter said:
I miss Audrey's amiable ramblings.bigjohnowls said:
Audrey has some amazing findings though!!Peter_the_Punter said:
I agree.peter_from_putney said:***** Betting Post *****
Following a series of highly encouraging series of polling figures for Labour over the past 2 - 3 days, my "Bet of the Week" is for theTories to win FEWER than 284.5 seats on offer from bet365 at odds of 10/11 (1.91 decimal). Unless the Blues start to recover very soon they are starting to look like a busted flush.
As ever, DYOR.
As ever, DYOFR
Free the PB One!
?
I thought Sean T was going to get it overturned?0 -
BJESUS going to be more accurate though!!!! (We will see)Peter_the_Punter said:
More like three, John.bigjohnowls said:
Whoever governs will not have much room for manoeuvre until 2018, at best.
Btw, comparisons with Jack's ARSE are odious. You simply feed poll findings into an automatic calculator. His projections are based on careful sampling, judicious weighting, skill, experience, and copious amounts of best malt whisky.
I'm afraid you cannot hope to compete.0 -
I seem to remember there may have been issues with accusations being made. We all know Labour are very litigious when it comes to Rotherham so have to tread carefully.nigel4england said:
Is Socrates banned for raising Rotherham? If so that is terriblebigjohnowls said:
Presumably Socrates still banned tooPulpstar said:
Suggestions that Uncle Vince is going to lose his seat are verbotenPeter_the_Punter said:
I think she peed off OGH once too often.Ishmael_X said:
Was audrey warned off, or is she just busy with her algorithms?Peter_the_Punter said:
I miss Audrey's amiable ramblings.bigjohnowls said:
Audrey has some amazing findings though!!Peter_the_Punter said:
I agree.peter_from_putney said:***** Betting Post *****
Following a series of highly encouraging series of polling figures for Labour over the past 2 - 3 days, my "Bet of the Week" is for theTories to win FEWER than 284.5 seats on offer from bet365 at odds of 10/11 (1.91 decimal). Unless the Blues start to recover very soon they are starting to look like a busted flush.
As ever, DYOR.
As ever, DYOFR
Free the PB One! ?
I thought Sean T was going to get it overturned?
Breitbart are shedding light on those allegations made by UKIP against the Conservative's star defector Amjad Bashir:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/
0 -
Thanks to The Blessed Margarets anti union/strike laws, it's MUCH harder for the Unions to bring the country to it's knee's than it was in the 70's.saddo said:
There will be a serious risk of the Winter of Discontent from 78/9 being rerun, but much worse. The unions would be demanding their pounds of flesh, which there's no money to pay for and it will be topped up by England being ruled by Scottish minority votes.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
All potentially with weak Ed in charge.
Horrific prospect.
Even Ed wouldn't be silly enough to repeal Maggie's strike laws.... Would he? :O
0 -
Only consolation if Ed does get in is that Socialism will be destroyed for a generation.saddo said:
There will be a serious risk of the Winter of Discontent from 78/9 being rerun, but much worse. The unions would be demanding their pounds of flesh, which there's no money to pay for and it will be topped up by England being ruled by Scottish minority votes.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
All potentially with weak Ed in charge.
Horrific prospect.0 -
I am tempted to bring my Generic Universal Electoral Statistical Sampler into action.bigjohnowls said:
BJESUS going to be more accurate though!!!! (We will see)Peter_the_Punter said:
More like three, John.bigjohnowls said:
Whoever governs will not have much room for manoeuvre until 2018, at best.
Btw, comparisons with Jack's ARSE are odious. You simply feed poll findings into an automatic calculator. His projections are based on careful sampling, judicious weighting, skill, experience, and copious amounts of best malt whisky.
I'm afraid you cannot hope to compete.
0 -
Wheras the Tories will be finenigel4england said:
Only consolation if Ed does get in is that Socialism will be destroyed for a generation.saddo said:
There will be a serious risk of the Winter of Discontent from 78/9 being rerun, but much worse. The unions would be demanding their pounds of flesh, which there's no money to pay for and it will be topped up by England being ruled by Scottish minority votes.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
All potentially with weak Ed in charge.
Horrific prospect.
0 -
Yes but it doesn't make sense that UKIP is down 3 and the 3 has been spread among the Greens, the LDs and Labour.peter_from_putney said:
Absolutely right and indeed it's already happening (and is referred to) in the Stephen Fisher model - every week from hereon is key!Pulpstar said:These seat models are all going to start heading Labour's way fairly soon if the polls don't start swinging back alot more than they have.
I'm a UKIP member and about 2/3rds of Ukippers are natural Conservatives, the other third would be more at home in the Labour party if it were anti EU.
I can see very few Ukippers moving to the Greens or the LDs, those on the left of UKIP gave up on Labour years ago and EdM isn't going to attract them back.
More evidence is required.0 -
Perhaps the public don't like the way that the Tories conduct their politics, which is to go back to dividing the country. If you look at the polling by YouGov, the Tories are seen as representing one section of society i.e the people with money.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
While they may not be sure about Labour, they are willing to trust them to deliver a government that is fairer to more people. They realise that the country has a pile of debt and that there will be difficult spending choices. Labour are trusted more on NHS, schools and essential public services. Whereas the Tories are seen as wanting to make cuts, purely because they don't really support the public sector.
Following the Banking crash and other scandals the public now have a total distrust of the wealthy elite in the City of London, with the Tories seen as being too friendly. When the Tories receive so much in donations from hedge fund managers, it is very difficult for them to also mention Labours close relationship with Bankers during the last government.
Labour should win the election, as they represent more people than the Tories are likely to under Cameron. If the Tories want to become the natural party of government again, they have to move back to being a one nation party, with policies that appeal to more people.0 -
The Paul Bloomfield case is utterly beyond belief. We have a government chucking disabled people out of their homes, when they could be saving money by actually collecting some tax from millionaires. If Ed Miliband can come up with an even half-credible programme for putting shysters like Bloomfield behind bars, then the election is his.0
-
I'm far from convinced any of that is true. To what extent is ANY Opposition ready for Government - similar comments were made about Blair in 1996-7 ?GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
What astonishes me is the complete lack of political insight - the question is not why are people considering voting Labour in sufficient numbers to form the next Government but why, after five years, are they NOT voting Conservative ?
Instead of banging on about the perceived failings of Labour, why not try some self-criticism from a Conservative viewpoint ? Has the Party, as part of a Coalition, comported itself well since 2010 ? Why have significant groups of those who supported Cameron in 2010 abandoned him now - immigration, the EU, the economy ?0 -
Perhaps, but I think the public are in for a terrible shock about what the Labour government (if it happens) will be like and I think Labour supporters have no comprehension of the unpopularity they will be facing by 2017.hucks67 said:
Perhaps the public don't like the way that the Tories conduct their politics, which is to go back to dividing the country. If you look at the polling by YouGov, the Tories are seen as representing one section of society i.e the people with money.GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.bigjohnowls said:
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
While they may not be sure about Labour, they are willing to trust them to deliver a government that is fairer to more people. They realise that the country has a pile of debt and that there will be difficult spending choices. Labour are trusted more on NHS, schools and essential public services. Whereas the Tories are seen as wanting to make cuts, purely because they don't really support the public sector.
Following the Banking crash and other scandals the public now have a total distrust of the wealthy elite in the City of London, with the Tories seen as being too friendly. When the Tories receive so much in donations from hedge fund managers, it is very difficult for them to also mention Labours close relationship with Bankers during the last government.
Labour should win the election, as they represent more people than the Tories are likely to under Cameron. If the Tories want to become the natural party of government again, they have to move back to being a one nation party, with policies that appeal to more people.
0 -
The last four weeks, since mid-Jan, must have been deeply disappointing for Conservative Central Office. By now they weould have been expecting to be seeing regular, consistent poll leads, albeit small ones, relying on a big push over the next 12 weeks to see them home with something >300 seats and a reasonable prospect therefore of continuing in Government. Instead the reverse has happened and Labour's already small lead is increasing. It's very difficult to see how the Tories are going to recover the position from here and if pushed, my current expectation is for them to win around 260-265 seats. On this basis, SkyBet's 12/1 on them winning between 226 - 250 seats looks like a worthwhile punt for small stakes.
DYOR.0 -
I admit I am concerned at the way that rich people seem to have done best out of the recession. Generally I am not concerned about people becoming stinking rich as it has benefits for the rest of us, as does an economic system that allows them to do so. But they should pay their fair share of tax and should shoulder their fair portion of risk. If any of those who destroyed the banking system from within were now working at McDonalds to make ends meet, I would be happier, but they are probably enjoying comfortable retirements or indeed be re-employed by a banking sector that should actually regard them as unemployable.hucks67 said:
Perhaps the public don't like the way that the Tories conduct their politics, which is to go back to dividing the country. If you look at the polling by YouGov, the Tories are seen as representing one section of society i.e the people with money.
While they may not be sure about Labour, they are willing to trust them to deliver a government that is fairer to more people. They realise that the country has a pile of debt and that there will be difficult spending choices. Labour are trusted more on NHS, schools and essential public services. Whereas the Tories are seen as wanting to make cuts, purely because they don't really support the public sector.
Following the Banking crash and other scandals the public now have a total distrust of the wealthy elite in the City of London, with the Tories seen as being too friendly. When the Tories receive so much in donations from hedge fund managers, it is very difficult for them to also mention Labours close relationship with Bankers during the last government.
Labour should win the election, as they represent more people than the Tories are likely to under Cameron. If the Tories want to become the natural party of government again, they have to move back to being a one nation party, with policies that appeal to more people.
But I will still vote Tory as the only party that can deliver the correct economic system for growth and keep some sort of check on public expenditure.
0 -
I'm not sure the allegation is that they failed to collect the tax (belatedly) but that they failed to prosecute for such an allegedly blatant disregard of the tax laws.ThomasNashe said:The Paul Bloomfield case is utterly beyond belief. We have a government chucking disabled people out of their homes, when they could be saving money by actually collecting some tax from millionaires. If Ed Miliband can come up with an even half-credible programme for putting shysters like Bloomfield behind bars, then the election is his.
0 -
Labour don't appeal to that many more, though, do they? Both them and the Tories are on around a third of the vote. Truth be told, none of the 3 main parties bring out any excitement.hucks67 said:GIN1138 said:
Labour should win the election, as they represent more people than the Tories are likely to under Cameron. If the Tories want to become the natural party of government again, they have to move back to being a one nation party, with policies that appeal to more people.
Us in the public sector realise that Labour cuts are going to be as bad as Tory cuts.
Miliband will probably be PM, because he's not a Conservative. Most voters don't want him, or David Cameron in Downing Street.
The problem is, that we don't really know what we want, only that it's not them.
0 -
Well, I'm sure the Conservatives under Boris will look every inch the next Government-in-waiting but the truth is unpopularity in 2017 won't prevent re-election in 2020.GIN1138 said:
Perhaps, but I think the public are in for a terrible shock about what the Labour government (if it happens) will be like and I think Labour supporters have no comprehension of the unpopularity they will be facing by 2017.
0 -
From the BBC report, it's not clear whether he eventually paid any tax or not.JohnLilburne said:
I'm not sure the allegation is that they failed to collect the tax (belatedly) but that they failed to prosecute for such an allegedly blatant disregard of the tax laws.ThomasNashe said:The Paul Bloomfield case is utterly beyond belief. We have a government chucking disabled people out of their homes, when they could be saving money by actually collecting some tax from millionaires. If Ed Miliband can come up with an even half-credible programme for putting shysters like Bloomfield behind bars, then the election is his.
0 -
1. Blair had a HUGE prospectus for government. They were probably unprepared from the POV that they have been out of power for so long hardly anybody knew what being in government would be like, but in terms of Labour's policies there was a LOT of things they wanted to do in 1997 and a very clear direction they wanted to follow.stodge said:
I'm far from convinced any of that is true. To what extent is ANY Opposition ready for Government - similar comments were made about Blair in 1996-7 ?GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
What astonishes me is the complete lack of political insight - the question is not why are people considering voting Labour in sufficient numbers to form the next Government but why, after five years, are they NOT voting Conservative ?
Instead of banging on about the perceived failings of Labour, why not try some self-criticism from a Conservative viewpoint ? Has the Party, as part of a Coalition, comported itself well since 2010 ? Why have significant groups of those who supported Cameron in 2010 abandoned him now - immigration, the EU, the economy ?
2. As far as the Conservatives go, I think it's always been quite obvious they would become very unpopular and when Cameron/Osborne failed to secure a decent Conservative majority in 2010 (which would have given them some leeway to lose seats in 2015) most Con supporters realised it was quite likely this would be a one term Conservative led government.
Mervyn King predicted that whoever won in 2010 would be "out of power for a generation" so I suppose the Tories are lucky things aren't a LOT worse.
It's a double whammy for the Tories that the party is hated, the leader is a pretty terrible politician and they are in government at a time when they have to do a LOT of very unpopular things.
But if Labour wins in May the storyline very quickly moves on and I just don't think the Labour government will be in any way credible.
0 -
Agree, for a government led by an ex communication adviser to Carlton Comm's to have such weak control of the narrative is terrible.stodge said:
I'm far from convinced any of that is true. To what extent is ANY Opposition ready for Government - similar comments were made about Blair in 1996-7 ?GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
What astonishes me is the complete lack of political insight - the question is not why are people considering voting Labour in sufficient numbers to form the next Government but why, after five years, are they NOT voting Conservative ?
Instead of banging on about the perceived failings of Labour, why not try some self-criticism from a Conservative viewpoint ? Has the Party, as part of a Coalition, comported itself well since 2010 ? Why have significant groups of those who supported Cameron in 2010 abandoned him now - immigration, the EU, the economy ?
The Tories have a very strong record over the last 4 1/2 years but you'd hardly spot it from what's being said. Luckily for them Ed is crap, so Labour aren't in the lead.
An Ali Campbell led narrative & message management of Cameron's actual achievements would have the Tories miles ahead.0 -
There's is a distinct lack of clarity about whether they've managed to collect any tax at all. And he certainly didn't pay any tax for 24 years. My point is that if Miliband can show he's serious about going after tax evaders, it would be the issue that could win him the election. I like most other people want to see the Revenue go after tax evaders in the same way that the DWP goes after benefit fraudsters.JohnLilburne said:
I'm not sure the allegation is that they failed to collect the tax (belatedly) but that they failed to prosecute for such an allegedly blatant disregard of the tax laws.ThomasNashe said:The Paul Bloomfield case is utterly beyond belief. We have a government chucking disabled people out of their homes, when they could be saving money by actually collecting some tax from millionaires. If Ed Miliband can come up with an even half-credible programme for putting shysters like Bloomfield behind bars, then the election is his.
0 -
'The Party with the candidate who will make the best MP for my local area' 8%
'The Party with the policies on issues important to me' 66%
If evidence was needed that people vote for parties and not individual MP's0 -
It's often the case that PR people are usually terrible at PR, LOL!saddo said:
Agree, for a government led by an ex communication adviser to Carlton Comm's to have such weak control of the narrative is terrible.stodge said:
I'm far from convinced any of that is true. To what extent is ANY Opposition ready for Government - similar comments were made about Blair in 1996-7 ?GIN1138 said:
It should absolutely scare Labour supporters to death just how unprepared Lab seem's to be for government, especially at this time of economic uncertainty.
Labour has no real proposals for government, has a leader that is odd and can't relate to people and a shadow cabinet that is utterly ineffective.
There is absolutely no reason at all why they should form the next government... Yet, it seems they are going to.
Clearly the only reason for putting them into power is because the public want's/expects "the money tree" to be turned back on. When it doesn't get turned back on and people have to face up to the fact that irrespective of who is in Downing Street, the good times they knew in the 90's and 00's are over, there will be a LOT of unhappy people.
What astonishes me is the complete lack of political insight - the question is not why are people considering voting Labour in sufficient numbers to form the next Government but why, after five years, are they NOT voting Conservative ?
Instead of banging on about the perceived failings of Labour, why not try some self-criticism from a Conservative viewpoint ? Has the Party, as part of a Coalition, comported itself well since 2010 ? Why have significant groups of those who supported Cameron in 2010 abandoned him now - immigration, the EU, the economy ?
Like telecommunications company's are usually the worst at communicating with their costumers...
0 -
Dave is Nicola is only relevant in ~60 seats.TwistedFireStopper said:
Labour don't appeal to that many more, though, do they? Both them and the Tories are on around a third of the vote. Truth be told, none of the 3 main parties bring out any excitement.hucks67 said:GIN1138 said:
Labour should win the election, as they represent more people than the Tories are likely to under Cameron. If the Tories want to become the natural party of government again, they have to move back to being a one nation party, with policies that appeal to more people.
Us in the public sector realise that Labour cuts are going to be as bad as Tory cuts.
Miliband will probably be PM, because he's not a Conservative. Most voters don't want him, or David Cameron in Downing Street.
The problem is, that we don't really know what we want, only that it's not them.0 -
I'm not convinced it will be Boris leading Tories after May. If the Tories are thrown out, I have a feeling the wider party will want to move on quickly from the posho's like Osborne, Boris, etc...stodge said:
Well, I'm sure the Conservatives under Boris will look every inch the next Government-in-waiting but the truth is unpopularity in 2017 won't prevent re-election in 2020.GIN1138 said:
Perhaps, but I think the public are in for a terrible shock about what the Labour government (if it happens) will be like and I think Labour supporters have no comprehension of the unpopularity they will be facing by 2017.
I would suspect Boris goes in as favourite (but falls away as the favourite always does) and it goes to Theresa or maybe a complete outsider like Sajid Javid.
0 -
So the Conservatives are going to lose in May because they didn't quite win in 2010 and have had to do some unpopular thingsGIN1138 said:
1. Blair had a HUGE prospectus for government. They were probably unprepared from the POV that they have been out of power for so long hardly anybody knew what being in government would be like, but in terms of Labour's policies there was a LOT of things they wanted to do in 1997 and a very clear direction they wanted to follow.
2. As far as the Conservatives go, I think it's always been quite obvious they would become very unpopular and when Cameron/Osborne failed to secure a decent Conservative majority in 2010 (which would have given them some leeway to lose seats in 2015) most Con supporters realised it was quite likely this would be a one term Conservative led government.
Mervyn King predicted that whoever won in 2010 would be "out of power for a generation" so I suppose the Tories are lucky things aren't a LOT worse.
It's a double whammy for the Tories that the party is hated, the leader is a pretty terrible politician and they are in government at a time when they have to do a LOT of very unpopular things.
But if Labour wins in May the storyline very quickly moves on and I just don't think the Labour government will be in any way credible.
Really - that's it ? The argument boils down to "We're pretty bad but Labour would be worse".
0 -
@ThomasNashe
You can hardly blame the tax inspectors? look at the number of them in comparison to those we have too employ on benefit fraud?
I am not very sure of the money involved here, but benefit fraud is essential to stop money being wasted.
I know....
What we need is one of our resident experts to show how much money is lost through tax , and how much due to benefit fraud.
You can always trust PB for insight.
0 -
That's my reading of it. And by the way I'm NOT a Tory member and the Conservatives are NOT "my" party.stodge said:
So the Conservatives are going to lose in May because they didn't quite win in 2010 and have had to do some unpopular thingsGIN1138 said:
1. Blair had a HUGE prospectus for government. They were probably unprepared from the POV that they have been out of power for so long hardly anybody knew what being in government would be like, but in terms of Labour's policies there was a LOT of things they wanted to do in 1997 and a very clear direction they wanted to follow.
2. As far as the Conservatives go, I think it's always been quite obvious they would become very unpopular and when Cameron/Osborne failed to secure a decent Conservative majority in 2010 (which would have given them some leeway to lose seats in 2015) most Con supporters realised it was quite likely this would be a one term Conservative led government.
Mervyn King predicted that whoever won in 2010 would be "out of power for a generation" so I suppose the Tories are lucky things aren't a LOT worse.
It's a double whammy for the Tories that the party is hated, the leader is a pretty terrible politician and they are in government at a time when they have to do a LOT of very unpopular things.
But if Labour wins in May the storyline very quickly moves on and I just don't think the Labour government will be in any way credible.
Really - that's it ? The argument boils down to "We're pretty bad but Labour would be worse".
0 -
I think Javid is really over-rated. He was seriously unimpressive in his Andrew Neil interview last weekend.GIN1138 said:
I'm not convinced it will be Boris leading Tories after May. If the Tories are thrown out, I have a feeling the wider party will want to move on quickly from the posho's like Osborne, Boris, etc...stodge said:
Well, I'm sure the Conservatives under Boris will look every inch the next Government-in-waiting but the truth is unpopularity in 2017 won't prevent re-election in 2020.GIN1138 said:
Perhaps, but I think the public are in for a terrible shock about what the Labour government (if it happens) will be like and I think Labour supporters have no comprehension of the unpopularity they will be facing by 2017.
I would suspect Boris goes in as favourite (but falls away as the favourite always does) and it goes to Theresa or maybe a complete outsider like Sajid Javid.0 -
@Mike: I do not agree this is a bad poll fro UKIP. Given these are Con/ Lab marginals [ and not just this time ], it is expected that others will be squeezed. In fact, it is the UKIP 15% which may have given such a largish swing to Labour.
If all English marginal seats voted like this, as they say, EICIPM !!!!!!0 -
Yes, it's about deterrence. I have no problem with benefit fraudsters going to jail. I'm just perplexed as to why tax evaders don't get treated in the same way - the potential savings from cases like Bloomfield's are far, far greater. We need some high profile convictions and imprisonments 'pour encourager les autres'.Smarmeron said:@ThomasNashe
You can hardly blame the tax inspectors? look at the number of them in comparison to those we have too employ on benefit fraud?
I am not very sure of the money involved here, but benefit fraud is essential to stop money being wasted.
I know....
What we need is one of our resident experts to show how much money is lost through tax , and how much due to benefit fraud.
You can always trust PB for insight.0 -
*Lucky0
-
Quite right too. The Crown is under a statutory duty not to disclose an individual's tax affairs to the world at large (Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, ss. 17-23). If the Crown has chosen not to institute criminal proceedings, it may not adversely speculate to the media about the matter.JohnLilburne said:From the BBC report, it's not clear whether he eventually paid any tax or not.
0 -
@ThomasNashe
There you run into a problem of human nature.
Can you honestly expect someone to go after his friends, family and acquaintances when it is obviously the "others" who are to blame?
That would mean questioning ones own judgement, a topic that seems lacking in some schools?0 -
I apologise if I have inferred that. My observation of your posts over time however is you write from an anti-Labour and often pro-Conservative perspective.GIN1138 said:
That's my reading of it. And by the way I'm NOT a Tory member and the Conservatives are NOT "my" party.
I'm more than happy to accept you are not a Conservative member or supporter.
0 -
Firestopper
"The problem is, that we don't really know what we want, only that it's not them."
I just heard a vox pop with a voter in Chippenham. An ordinary worker in a donkey jacket who said he voted Lib Dem last time but he didn't think he was voting for the Tories. He was angry and wouldn't vote for them again.
Clegg's decision to get intimate with the Tories was the biggest mistake by a mainstream party in my lifetime. If they'd remained independent I've no doubt UKIP would have been strangled at birth and they would now be serious contenders for government possibly as largest party.
Even if they'd gone mid way in supporting the Tories they might have lived to fight another day. But what their voters couldn't stomach was the open love affair between Cameron Alexander Osborne and Clegg.0 -
What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/0 -
This has been a bad week for the Tories !
0 -
Oh ! Deary me !! Any due diligence done. Or only too happy to get a UKIP defector ! Poor homework.Pulpstar said:What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/0 -
You are even more right wing ?GIN1138 said:
That's my reading of it. And by the way I'm NOT a Tory member and the Conservatives are NOT "my" party.stodge said:
So the Conservatives are going to lose in May because they didn't quite win in 2010 and have had to do some unpopular thingsGIN1138 said:
1. Blair had a HUGE prospectus for government. They were probably unprepared from the POV that they have been out of power for so long hardly anybody knew what being in government would be like, but in terms of Labour's policies there was a LOT of things they wanted to do in 1997 and a very clear direction they wanted to follow.
2. As far as the Conservatives go, I think it's always been quite obvious they would become very unpopular and when Cameron/Osborne failed to secure a decent Conservative majority in 2010 (which would have given them some leeway to lose seats in 2015) most Con supporters realised it was quite likely this would be a one term Conservative led government.
Mervyn King predicted that whoever won in 2010 would be "out of power for a generation" so I suppose the Tories are lucky things aren't a LOT worse.
It's a double whammy for the Tories that the party is hated, the leader is a pretty terrible politician and they are in government at a time when they have to do a LOT of very unpopular things.
But if Labour wins in May the storyline very quickly moves on and I just don't think the Labour government will be in any way credible.
Really - that's it ? The argument boils down to "We're pretty bad but Labour would be worse".0 -
The pearl brigade will never vote for Javid.GIN1138 said:
I'm not convinced it will be Boris leading Tories after May. If the Tories are thrown out, I have a feeling the wider party will want to move on quickly from the posho's like Osborne, Boris, etc...stodge said:
Well, I'm sure the Conservatives under Boris will look every inch the next Government-in-waiting but the truth is unpopularity in 2017 won't prevent re-election in 2020.GIN1138 said:
Perhaps, but I think the public are in for a terrible shock about what the Labour government (if it happens) will be like and I think Labour supporters have no comprehension of the unpopularity they will be facing by 2017.
I would suspect Boris goes in as favourite (but falls away as the favourite always does) and it goes to Theresa or maybe a complete outsider like Sajid Javid.0 -
@DavidL
Agreed.
I've just taken Lab Majority at 18. Not because think it will happen, but because it's a great trading bet.0 -
The Watcher will be along shortly to claim notsurbiton said:This has been a bad week for the Tories !
0 -
Doubt it, he can be called many things but he's not a Conservative shill.bigjohnowls said:
The Watcher will be along shortly to claim notsurbiton said:This has been a bad week for the Tories !
0 -
Through my rum-induced haze a few betting points after this memorable week.
Take Lab Maj at 18. Labour are clearly undervalued so it's a good trading bet.
There has got to be big trading bets on NZL if they lose to SRI tonight. The Kiwis should still go through and the draw favours them.0 -
@Bigjohnowls What do you think of the Daily Mail's attempts to keep Green-Red potential switchers onside ?0
-
I wonder what Rod Crosby and ARSE will be saying?
Presumably just a blip and still Tory Maj 99% chance and Ed will NEVER be PM0 -
The entire Ukip strategy is predicated on the Tories being kicked out. So @MikeK is right – it's a good poll for Ukip.surbiton said:@Mike: I do not agree this is a bad poll fro UKIP. Given these are Con/ Lab marginals [ and not just this time ], it is expected that others will be squeezed. In fact, it is the UKIP 15% which may have given such a largish swing to Labour.
If all English marginal seats voted like this, as they say, EICIPM !!!!!!0 -
Ed's problem is that these easy hits cannot last forever – they can't possibly persist for another 80 days.Pulpstar said:What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/0 -
Missed it.Pulpstar said:@Bigjohnowls What do you think of the Daily Mail's attempts to keep Green-Red potential switchers onside ?
You will be surprised to learn I do not read the Mail.
What did i miss?0 -
Rod Crosby is one good reason I'm not actually laying Conservative Majority DIRECTLY any more. However my guess is you should at least adjust the L&N model for Scotland. I beat JackW in terms of the Yes/No for the Scottish referendum so that doesn't worry me so much.bigjohnowls said:I wonder what Rod Crosby and ARSE will be saying?
Presumably just a blip and still Tory Maj 99% chance and Ed will NEVER be PM0 -
To stop all our expert posters beavering away trying to find the answer to my earlier question.
Thanks, but I have found a simple enough page for me to grasp and understand.
Obviously far below your levels, but...
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-benefit-fraud-perspective/157960 -
Stodge, i think you will find that most current Conservative supporters are reluctant to deliver a post mortem when the patient is still very much alive! It's worth noting that back in 2010 many of us acknowledged that this was likely to be a one term government and that things would look pretty ugly mid-term. Many of us also said that the Tories' best hope was that a recovering economy would result in the electorate giving them credit, and that we expected some measure of swing back as the election occurred. There is some evidence of that, but at the moment it looks like it might not be enough. In the meantime we have watched as others on here have repeatedly discussed various firewalls that have been made of straw, and we now see outlying polls showing a 3pt Labour lead heralded as evidence we are doomed. Unsurprisingly we are not prepared to give up.
Why aren't the Tories doing better? The reasons are complex. In no order: (1) poor party management has impacted morale and unnecessarily driven defections of activists, supporters and one good MP; (2) the leadership has not demonstrated a commitment to the "all in it together principle" and have failed to connect with the electorate; (3) basic, unnecessary errors eg on boundary changes; (4) an insufficiently astute media operation; (5) it has had the courage to make tough decisions; (6) the electorate are still in fundamental denial about the extent to which we as a nation are living beyond our means and failing to invest (individually or collectively) sufficiently for the future; as a result the electorate is reluctant to take even the very gentle consequences of the austerity we have experienced; (7) there is a reluctance to give politicians due credit. If we had lost one million jobs during this parliament, had the lowest level of employment in record, were mired with the worst economic performance in the G7, had seen the NHS budget slashed and the NHS coping with fewer admissions than ever before and hosted the worst Olympics in history, how much blame would be attributed to government? The opposite is the case, and far from there being any praise or even recognition, we just move on to find the next thing we can grumble about; (8) failed pledges, particularly on immigration; (9) the collapse of the Lib Dems - the extent of which was unseen - has given Labour's polling credibility it does not warrant; (10) the rise of Ukip - part of a pan-European phenomenon and paradoxically now driven as much by Labour's failure as the Conservatives - has made it harder for Cameron to maintain a credible centrist approach; (11) the fundamental fault line that is the EU.
I could go on. In short, the Conservative party is deeply flawed and has made mistakes. It has also, alongside the Lib Dems, governed remarkably well in very difficult circumstances. Britain is in a much better state today than it was in May 2010. That is the ultimate test, and that is why I will be voting Conservative in 20150 -
The best play for the Tory press is to try to say a Labour government will cut as much as the Tories, so any anti-cuts people might as well go and vote for another party.Pulpstar said:@Bigjohnowls What do you think of the Daily Mail's attempts to keep Green-Red potential switchers onside ?
For all the posturing about the "centre ground", if Labour were to hold onto their "core vote" (2010 vote + Red Liberals) and claw back just a bit of ground in Scotland, then EICIPM. The Tories' ONLY hope is to encourage Labour's voters to peel off to other parties as they were doing in the final months of 2014.0 -
Utterly meaningless given that they lump legal tax avoidance with illegal tax evasion.Smarmeron said:To stop all our expert posters beavering away trying to find the answer to my earlier question.
Thanks, but I have found a simple enough page for me to grasp and understand.
Obviously far below your levels, but...
http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-benefit-fraud-perspective/15796
Not surprising you seem to think it has validity as it clearly fails to understand the difference between legal and illegal just like you.
0 -
The best trading bet is probably laying NOM @ 1.24 IMO.___Bobajob___ said:@DavidL
Agreed.
I've just taken Lab Majority at 18. Not because think it will happen, but because it's a great trading bet.
There has to be at least a 10-20% chance of the polls being wrong enough, a 1992 type situation, or a known unknown between now & polling day (Spain terrorist attack et al) - my guess is this is at the back of people minds and consequently, NOM will have a floor of perhaps ~1.2.
So laying NOM is a great trade-outable-for-low-loss bet, with excellent potential upside.
0 -
I am on New Zealand over 5.5 sixes at 23/20, they went 5/7 in the recent games against SL, looks a great price to me.___Bobajob___ said:Through my rum-induced haze a few betting points after this memorable week.
Take Lab Maj at 18. Labour are clearly undervalued so it's a good trading bet.
There has got to be big trading bets on NZL if they lose to SRI tonight. The Kiwis should still go through and the draw favours them.
Also bought Buttler performance at 43 for a bit of fun.0 -
The value seems to be in backing both parties for majorities then trading off. I've just taken Lab at 18. I'm going to wait until Sunday for the recent polling to push out the Tory Maj price, then back them.Pulpstar said:
Rod Crosby is one good reason I'm not actually laying Conservative Majority DIRECTLY any more. However my guess is you should at least adjust the L&N model for Scotland. I beat JackW in terms of the Yes/No for the Scottish referendum so that doesn't worry me so much.bigjohnowls said:I wonder what Rod Crosby and ARSE will be saying?
Presumably just a blip and still Tory Maj 99% chance and Ed will NEVER be PM0 -
Fair point. Let me have a look...Pong said:
The best trading bet is probably laying NOM @ 1.24 IMO.___Bobajob___ said:@DavidL
Agreed.
I've just taken Lab Majority at 18. Not because think it will happen, but because it's a great trading bet.
There has to be at least a 10-20% chance of the polls being wrong enough, a 1992 type situation, or a known unknown between now & polling day (Spain terrorist attack et al) - my guess is this is at the back of people minds and consequently, NOM will have a floor of perhaps ~1.2.
So laying NOM is a great trade-outable-for-low-loss bet, with excellent potential upside.0 -
That's true, but it DOES give him a platform to potentially build on. It gives him a chance to launch into a message of "look, I may be a geek, but atleast I have the guts to stand up to fat cats, tax dodgers and big businesses unlike all the other politicians".___Bobajob___ said:
Ed's problem is that these easy hits cannot last forever – they can't possibly persist for another 80 days.Pulpstar said:What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/
Whether or not he grasps that opportunity is another question.0 -
I notice some discussion of the Tory leadership. Just to say that Priti was in fine form at the dispatch box yesterday extolling the virtues of Scotch whisky. Leader in waiting.0
-
@Richard_Tyndall
Yes, there is a difference between legal and illegal.
One is stealing off the tax payer and risking a 10 year sentence, the other is just not paying tax in the first place. Of course a vanishingly minuscule amount of tax avoidance is also illegal, but in that case, it is a miss-demeanour, and prosecution is unlikely.
All in it together eh?0 -
In which case as I said - and you have just confirmed - the Fact Check page you so proudly quoted is garbage because they lump legal tax avoidance with illegal tax evasion and compare it with illegal benefit fraud.Smarmeron said:@Richard_Tyndall
Yes, there is a difference between legal and illegal.
One is stealing off the tax payer and risking a 10 year sentence, the other is just not paying tax in the first place. Of course a vanishingly minuscule amount of tax avoidance is also illegal, but in that case, it is a miss-demeanour, and prosecution is unlikely.
All in it together eh?0 -
Yes, you are right. Taken a nibble.___Bobajob___ said:
Fair point. Let me have a look...Pong said:
The best trading bet is probably laying NOM @ 1.24 IMO.___Bobajob___ said:@DavidL
Agreed.
I've just taken Lab Majority at 18. Not because think it will happen, but because it's a great trading bet.
There has to be at least a 10-20% chance of the polls being wrong enough, a 1992 type situation, or a known unknown between now & polling day (Spain terrorist attack et al) - my guess is this is at the back of people minds and consequently, NOM will have a floor of perhaps ~1.2.
So laying NOM is a great trade-outable-for-low-loss bet, with excellent potential upside.0 -
Nice bet Nigel, but too niche for me after this much rum. I think the trading value has got to be hoping for the Kiwi defeat tonight, then backing them.nigel4england said:
I am on New Zealand over 5.5 sixes at 23/20, they went 5/7 in the recent games against SL, looks a great price to me.___Bobajob___ said:Through my rum-induced haze a few betting points after this memorable week.
Take Lab Maj at 18. Labour are clearly undervalued so it's a good trading bet.
There has got to be big trading bets on NZL if they lose to SRI tonight. The Kiwis should still go through and the draw favours them.
Also bought Buttler performance at 43 for a bit of fun.0 -
He's actually extremely good at grasping those opportunities, so I don't doubt he will. My point is that those chances won't persist for 80 days. He's good attacking, poor when on the defence.Danny565 said:
That's true, but it DOES give him a platform to potentially build on. It gives him a chance to launch into a message of "look, I may be a geek, but atleast I have the guts to stand up to fat cats, tax dodgers and big businesses unlike all the other politicians".___Bobajob___ said:
Ed's problem is that these easy hits cannot last forever – they can't possibly persist for another 80 days.Pulpstar said:What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/
Whether or not he grasps that opportunity is another question.0 -
@Richard_Tyndall
Choose your weapon sir
"The figures clash significantly with those produced by HMRC, the government's tax collecting body. The PCS-commissioned research estimates that over 2013 and 14 the UK lost £73.4bn to tax evasion ("tax lost when a person or company deliberately and unlawfully fails to declare income that they know is taxable or claims expenses that are not allowed") over the course of the studied period, dwarfing the official government estimate of £22.3bn."0 -
He can be good at grasping those opportunities, but often when he's starting to get some traction with one of his populist anti-fat-cat attacks, he suddenly drops it -- I suspect because he lets Ed Balls and the "Blairite" prats talk him out of being seen as supposedly "anti-business" or "anti-aspiration".___Bobajob___ said:
He's actually extremely good at grasping those opportunities, so I don't doubt he will. My point is that those chances won't persist for 80 days. He's good attacking, poor when on the defence.Danny565 said:
That's true, but it DOES give him a platform to potentially build on. It gives him a chance to launch into a message of "look, I may be a geek, but atleast I have the guts to stand up to fat cats, tax dodgers and big businesses unlike all the other politicians".___Bobajob___ said:
Ed's problem is that these easy hits cannot last forever – they can't possibly persist for another 80 days.Pulpstar said:What is it with Dave - can't stop surrounding himself with dodginess !
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/12/exclusive-tory-mep-reported-to-police-over-systematic-financial-fraud/
Whether or not he grasps that opportunity is another question.0 -
I am on Italy U20 with a 75 pt start against England U20's in the Rugbynigel4england said:
I am on New Zealand over 5.5 sixes at 23/20, they went 5/7 in the recent games against SL, looks a great price to me.___Bobajob___ said:Through my rum-induced haze a few betting points after this memorable week.
Take Lab Maj at 18. Labour are clearly undervalued so it's a good trading bet.
There has got to be big trading bets on NZL if they lose to SRI tonight. The Kiwis should still go through and the draw favours them.
Also bought Buttler performance at 43 for a bit of fun.
How to make a really one sided game have at least a bit of interest.
Italy U20'S are really crap.0 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31463868
Armando Iannucci tax claim sparks UKIP donor legal threat
Chris Mason
Looks like Armando Iannucci will be facing a lawsuit for deformation. Unless he offers an apology.0 -
You can be assured its been a very bad week for the Tories when there are so few Tory PBers around to jump to the Blues defence.0
-
Again utterly meaningless. The fact that research commissioned by a union provides unsubstantiated 'estimates' is hardly to be taken as reliable or unbiased. Nor should it be considered more accurate than the numbers produced by HMRC who do, after all, have access to at least some of the data.Smarmeron said:@Richard_Tyndall
Choose your weapon sir
"The figures clash significantly with those produced by HMRC, the government's tax collecting body. The PCS-commissioned research estimates that over 2013 and 14 the UK lost £73.4bn to tax evasion ("tax lost when a person or company deliberately and unlawfully fails to declare income that they know is taxable or claims expenses that are not allowed") over the course of the studied period, dwarfing the official government estimate of £22.3bn."
And to be honest quoting Richard Murphy - the man who seems to think there is no difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance - is laughable. It is like quoting Grant Shapps as an authority on how much the Tories deserve to win the next election.0 -
@Richard_Tyndall
I fall mortally wounded at the feet of a worthy opponent, but as a boon sir, I would ask you....
What figures do you believe?0 -
Considering what Armando Iannucci looks like that typo made me laugh. Thanks MikeK.MikeK said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31463868
Armando Iannucci tax claim sparks UKIP donor legal threat
Chris Mason
Looks like Armando Iannucci will be facing a lawsuit for deformation. Unless he offers an apology.0 -
I've said labour have had a good week on last thread and the tories need now to bring they A-Game if they have one.bigjohnowls said:You can be assured its been a very bad week for the Tories when there are so few Tory PBers around to jump to the Blues defence.
0 -
I think the defence would go something like: the HSBC data were a gift to ed, not something of his own making. Even ed could hardly screw this one up. Further such gifts are unlikely. The "ed the avoider" story may yet bite him on the arse. A week is a long time in politics, and it'll only take another couple of Yougov leads to get the blues singing again.bigjohnowls said:You can be assured its been a very bad week for the Tories when there are so few Tory PBers around to jump to the Blues defence.
0 -
My thesis for Tory voters is that there are around 10% of people who 'ought' to be Tories - they either currently benefit from Tory policies, have done in the past or will do in the future. On top of that are 20% plus suffering from false consciousness who mistakenly believe that the Tories are on their side. When the news is full of stories about wealthy Tory tax dodgers a few escape the clutches of false consciousness and return to sensible voting intention.
Do people think I could get a PhD for that?0 -
You are basically right in that the HSBC stuff was a gift. Lucky break for Ed, which he exploited well, but a lucky break nevertheless.Ishmael_X said:
I think the defence would go something like: the HSBC data were a gift to ed, not something of his own making. Even ed could hardly screw this one up. Further such gifts are unlikely. The "ed the avoider" story may yet bite him on the arse. A week is a long time in politics, and it'll only take another couple of Yougov leads to get the blues singing again.bigjohnowls said:You can be assured its been a very bad week for the Tories when there are so few Tory PBers around to jump to the Blues defence.
0 -
No problem.GeoffM said:
Considering what Armando Iannucci looks like that typo made me laugh. Thanks MikeK.MikeK said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31463868
Armando Iannucci tax claim sparks UKIP donor legal threat
Chris Mason
Looks like Armando Iannucci will be facing a lawsuit for deformation. Unless he offers an apology.
0 -
Well having read the latest Murphy report it certainly isn't him.Smarmeron said:@Richard_Tyndall
I fall mortally wounded at the feet of a worthy opponent, but as a boon sir, I would ask you....
What figures do you believe?
He estimates that 10% of all sales in the UK are undeclared - amounting to £100 billion worth of sales. But he then estimates that these sales would account for £40 billion worth of tax revenue. Meaning that he believes all sales in the UK are taxed at 40%.
I don't know what the real numbers should be. I do know that, given the choice between HMRC and the figures and illustrations produced by the PCS report, I would go with HMRC every time.
And given how much I distrust and dislike government bodies that is quite an admission from me and simply shows how crap the PCS report is.0 -
Perhaps some of the triumphalism of the Labour posters in the last couple of days is a tad premature. Come the election economic growth will be strong, unemployment falling, inflation negligible, wages rising and the tax threshold changes will benefit payslips in April. There's a budget to come too. Against that backdrop, and irrespective of noise around tax avoidance voters will have to consider Ed and Ed and decide can I take the chance?0
-
If the allegations are completely false, I would be furious if someone attempted to trash my reputation on national television. He deserves everything he has coming to him.MikeK said:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31463868
Armando Iannucci tax claim sparks UKIP donor legal threat
Chris Mason
Looks like Armando Iannucci will be facing a lawsuit for deformation. Unless he offers an apology.
0 -
Make sure you include the word "hegemony".SandyRentool said:My thesis for Tory voters is that there are around 10% of people who 'ought' to be Tories - they either currently benefit from Tory policies, have done in the past or will do in the future. On top of that are 20% plus suffering from false consciousness who mistakenly believe that the Tories are on their side. When the news is full of stories about wealthy Tory tax dodgers a few escape the clutches of false consciousness and return to sensible voting intention.
Do people think I could get a PhD for that?
0 -
Good news fellow PB'ers, it turns out that the wound wasn't mortal....he missed me completely!
No champagne bottles popping?0 -
It has no spelling mistakes, and contains the Marxist expression "false consciousness". You just need to stick in a reference to a seminal paper by Foucault, and you're home and dry.SandyRentool said:My thesis for Tory voters is that there are around 10% of people who 'ought' to be Tories - they either currently benefit from Tory policies, have done in the past or will do in the future. On top of that are 20% plus suffering from false consciousness who mistakenly believe that the Tories are on their side. When the news is full of stories about wealthy Tory tax dodgers a few escape the clutches of false consciousness and return to sensible voting intention.
Do people think I could get a PhD for that?
0
