politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Doctors dispute: Betting opens on whether Hunt will sur
Comments
-
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
And if they do go off to Australia, who do you think will get the blame?Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
By the way, there has been surprisingly little comment on PB about the fact Liam Fox is now Tory activists' top choice for next leader
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/fox-tops-our-next-leader-poll-but-with-the-joint-lowest-frontrunner-share-on-record.html
Even though it might be tempting to assume posters on a dedicated party website might be more radical than the average activist, it's worth remembering that the Labourlist surveys early on in the Lab leadership contest correctly predicted Corbynmania.0 -
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
0 -
It will evaporate in an instant if the general public ever realise that the greedy-guts hotfooting it to Sydney in pursuit of Australian salaries, have been on the receiving end of £100,000's of training funded by the taxpayer.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
You can use the menu on the left to change to per-capita spending. The dirty little secret of the NHS is that it is cheap.Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
I haven't finished a book today, but I did finally work out whose C19th Edinburgh philosophy lectures a manuscript volume were the notes from - after it had been on the problem shelf for 2 years.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
I can't even read the penultimate paragraph, let alone share it here.0 -
Mr. T, well, you did suggest it [from Journey to Altmortis, by Thaddeus White (me)]:
The claw she still carried ripped across his stomach and she clamped her hand over his mouth. His guts fell from the gaping wound and she thrust the claw into him again, and again, and again. Agonised sobs were muffled by her hand, and when his whimpering ceased she lowered his body carefully to the floor.0 -
This complaint, which by-and-large seems not to be made against other professions, is redolent of 1970s trots railing against private medicine for precisely the same reason.watford30 said:
It will evaporate in an instant if the general public ever realise that the greedy-guts hotfooting it to Sydney in pursuit of Australian salaries, have been on the receiving end of £100,000's of training funded by the taxpayer.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
If it were per capita it would still be a stupid measure - because GDP has no relation to health spending needs.DecrepitJohnL said:
You can use the menu on the left to change to per-capita spending. The dirty little secret of the NHS is that it is cheap.Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.0 -
I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!0 -
Go on then. Tell me do we spend more on health than the Belgians?Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
Jesus; betting on a cabinet minister's potential death is pretty sick0
-
I see what you're trying to do there.DecrepitJohnL said:
This complaint, which by-and-large seems not to be made against other professions, is redolent of 1970s trots railing against private medicine for precisely the same reason.watford30 said:
It will evaporate in an instant if the general public ever realise that the greedy-guts hotfooting it to Sydney in pursuit of Australian salaries, have been on the receiving end of £100,000's of training funded by the taxpayer.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
Can't dispute the truth of the matter, try to deflect, eh?
Do Aus even need any doctors?
I note the Australia encourage higher earners to take out private cover, and have a thriving private medical industry.
Just why do NHS cultists in this country rail against private healthcare? Is it because if it grew it would show up the NHS?0 -
13.5% bribe, will easily pay for a ticket.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
To be fair, the Belgians have some pretty serious mental issues that need addressing.Chris_A said:
Go on then. Tell me do we spend more on health than the Belgians?Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
Mr. T, it's less minerally.
Originally I was going to make it a castration scene, but it didn't work.0 -
"It is important to ascertain, before the qualifying insolvency event, whether there are any former employers who have not been discharged from liability—and it is amazing how often this step has been overlooked in practice. Trustees should ensure that the companies in question are discharged before the PPF assessment period, for example by the trustees investigating the financial position of the employer and concluding that any debt due from it falls under the third bullet point above."SeanT said:
Oh go on. It's fun. We're chillaxing.AlastairMeeks said:
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.0 -
This isn't a comprehension exercise. This is a politics site.Chris_A said:
Go on then. Tell me do we spend more on health than the Belgians?Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.
Why does this measure have any value?0 -
Newton's perfectly correct for everyday calculations, you're being a bit hard on the old chap. Not many relativistic stagecoaches back in the 17th century.FrancisUrquhart said:
Is that a bit like economists, predictions never wrong, merely the models were incomplete to world events, which couldn't have been predicted ahead of time and have since been adjusted (rinse and repeat every year)?Richard_Nabavi said:
Under the rulebook of the Union of Theoretical Physicists and Allied Trades, Newton and Einstein weren't wrong; instead, their theories were incomplete.FrancisUrquhart said:
Einstein wasn't 100% right on this latest discovery either. Is the nature of science. Some might say, “The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.”Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Alistair, Newton's theory of light was wrong (I forget if he thought it was wave or particle, but the side he opted for was scientifically dominant for centuries). That doesn't mean it didn't advance knowledge or wasn't of value.
0 -
I think Rubio is finished. That debate performance will haunt him forever. It's over for him.Casino_Royale said:I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!
Bush could potentially benefit. But time is running out. He needs Rubio to crash and burn so spectacularly over the next three weeks, that he is in a position to win Florida - the first winner takes all state. And with 99 delegates, this puts him right back into contention.
It's a long-shot (25-1) for things to play out that way for Bush, but it is possible.0 -
Well that's a final paragraph
Wife found top cancer scientist hanged in a rubber fetish suit in the woods after he took his dog for a walk
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3442478/Wife-cancer-scientist-hanged-rubber-suit-woods-took-dog-walk.html0 -
It's a 13.5% bribe for registrars in dermatology, and a 20% pay cut for those in A&E.saddened said:
13.5% bribe, will easily pay for a ticket.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
Agreed.rcs1000 said:
I think Rubio is finished. That debate performance will haunt him forever. It's over for him.Casino_Royale said:I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!
Bush could potentially benefit. But time is running out. He needs Rubio to crash and burn so spectacularly over the next three weeks, that he is in a position to win Florida - the first winner takes all state. And with 99 delegates, this puts him right back into contention.
It's a long-shot (25-1) for things to play out that way for Bush, but it is possible.
I've been very suspicious of the 'you can't lay too much Bush' theory that has been popular in these parts this year.0 -
Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.0 -
Is it a romance novel that ends in divorce?AlastairMeeks said:
"It is important to ascertain, before the qualifying insolvency event, whether there are any former employers who have not been discharged from liability—and it is amazing how often this step has been overlooked in practice. Trustees should ensure that the companies in question are discharged before the PPF assessment period, for example by the trustees investigating the financial position of the employer and concluding that any debt due from it falls under the third bullet point above."SeanT said:
Oh go on. It's fun. We're chillaxing.AlastairMeeks said:
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.0 -
Mr. T, I'm glad you said that, because that's what I was going for (if anyone's read, or reads in the future, the book they'll see what I mean). I don't do explicit sexual stuff, but there are some grim and creepy undertones.0
-
Quite. 6th biggest economy, 19th in the health spending per capita league table. How long do you think it'll be before all the usual suspects pop up denouncing the World Bank as a socialist organisation with made up figures?DecrepitJohnL said:
You can use the menu on the left to change to per-capita spending. The dirty little secret of the NHS is that it is cheap.Mortimer said:
Nah, we've been through this before.Chris_A said:
You could start here http://shr.sagepub.com/content/2/7/60.short from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.MattW said:
Is there any evidence to support that, by any chance?Chris_A said:Watford, Mortimer et al I don't know anyone who thinks the NHS is a religious movement but you'd be hard pushed to find a more efficient service. And if people are going to get what they pay for then the government's going to have to get the message across that they don't pay for very much.
And I'd have the evens on Hunt going of I were you.; he won't last beyond the summer.
There there's the evidence of how little we spend collectively on healthcare
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc
Comparing health spending to GDP is STUPID. Because if we all had a 100% pay rise (or, in reality, if our GDP doubled) our health spending would not likely need to double, but our performance on this measure would halve.0 -
SimonStClare said:
Is it a romance novel that ends in divorce?AlastairMeeks said:
"It is important to ascertain, before the qualifying insolvency event, whether there are any former employers who have not been discharged from liability—and it is amazing how often this step has been overlooked in practice. Trustees should ensure that the companies in question are discharged before the PPF assessment period, for example by the trustees investigating the financial position of the employer and concluding that any debt due from it falls under the third bullet point above."SeanT said:
Oh go on. It's fun. We're chillaxing.AlastairMeeks said:
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.0 -
I'm thinking of calling it THE WIND OFFSPRING.SimonStClare said:
Is it a romance novel that ends in divorce?AlastairMeeks said:
"It is important to ascertain, before the qualifying insolvency event, whether there are any former employers who have not been discharged from liability—and it is amazing how often this step has been overlooked in practice. Trustees should ensure that the companies in question are discharged before the PPF assessment period, for example by the trustees investigating the financial position of the employer and concluding that any debt due from it falls under the third bullet point above."SeanT said:
Oh go on. It's fun. We're chillaxing.AlastairMeeks said:
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.
I'd better get in there quickly before the title is taken.0 -
Its ridiculous all the difficult to recruit to specialties get pay cut.rcs1000 said:
It's a 13.5% bribe for registrars in dermatology, and a 20% pay cut for those in A&E.saddened said:
13.5% bribe, will easily pay for a ticket.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
Those where no incentive is needed will be more over subscribed with 13.5% pay rise.
This SoS makes Lansley look like he knew what he was doing.0 -
I'm sure I've touted them here before (and am selling them badly here, two Whiskey/sodas in), but Izabella Kaminska at the FT has written fantastic pieces on the oversupply of cash in the world - suggesting that this is the new normal for interest rates.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
I don't think she has been proved wrong yet.0 -
My favourite thing about that picture is the venn diagram!0
-
You wonder whether he ever gets writer's block.SeanT said:MY ASS IS HAUNTED BY THE GAY UNICORN COLONEL
*cough*
Sorry, Mike. I'll order an Uber.0 -
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.0 -
Mr. Meeks, sounds like hot, barely legal action.0
-
Has there ever been a book where the main character is tormented by a stain on the wall, that no matter how many times he paints over it still shows, and then when he wallpapers over it, he still cant help look at that part of the wall?
That was my idea for a book when I was a teenager, a (rather obvious now I think of it) metaphor for being unable to get over an incident in his personal life, and one I probably subconsciously copied...
I did that for a tune I wrote in drama class in 1987, took me until 2010 to realise it was "Take It Easy" by the Eagles with different words... there is a great episode of Frasier (The Crane Critique) where an author realises he has done this0 -
No, you (and she) are quite correct. The response of many firms to 2008 has been to build up cash stockpiles in case the market for credit "crunches" again. As usual, people prepare for the next crisis by responding to the last one.Mortimer said:
I'm sure I've touted them here before (and am selling them badly here, two Whiskey/sodas in), but Izabella Kaminska at the FT has written fantastic pieces on the oversupply of cash in the world - suggesting that this is the new normal for interest rates.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
I don't think she has been proved wrong yet.
0 -
Does the uniformity fit your pal's 'liquidation of assets by petro-nations' theory?rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.0 -
Mr. Isam, that sounds oddly familiar.0
-
Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?0 -
Why the hell is this not being talked about in the press (and by that I mean BBC)? This seems so utterly stupid yet this isn't the focus of the debate. Is it simply because that would mean the doctors admitting that this is (quite rightly, by the way) about pay?bigjohnowls said:
Its ridiculous all the difficult to recruit to specialties get pay cut.rcs1000 said:
It's a 13.5% bribe for registrars in dermatology, and a 20% pay cut for those in A&E.saddened said:
13.5% bribe, will easily pay for a ticket.Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
Those where no incentive is needed will be more over subscribed with 13.5% pay rise.
This SoS makes Lansley look like he knew what he was doing.0 -
Yes.Mortimer said:
Does the uniformity fit your pal's 'liquidation of assets by petro-nations' theory?rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.0 -
Thanks Robert - you really ought to charge us for the economic education you freely provide here!rcs1000 said:
Yes.Mortimer said:
Does the uniformity fit your pal's 'liquidation of assets by petro-nations' theory?rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.0 -
The story of the day. NINE of the 20 NHS CEOs supposedly supporting #juniorcontract imposition actually reject it. Five more refuse to support.0 -
0
-
How did I miss this?
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 18h18 hours ago
Polling #SouthCarolina tonight - prelim results show @realDonaldTrump with yuge lead - full results tomorrow night #SCPrimary
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 16h16 hours ago
Prelim results also show massive battle for 2nd in #SouthCarolina #SCPrimary
Looks like a repeat of New Hampshire.0 -
And still have no impact.bigjohnowls said:Reckon this will pass 100k tonight
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/108782
Does anyone here sign these petitions? They're ludicrous.
0 -
Given Trump and Cruz have well over 50% between them even if all the mainstream candidates rallied behind Rubio he would still most likely lose. It is about as likely to succeed as the great 'Burnham-Cooper-Kendall' alliance did in thwarting Corbyn!david_herdson said:
Although NH and Iowa threw up acceptable candidates between them. Neither Cruz nor Trump is anywhere near ideal for a lot of people. At the moment it's still a three way split between Trump, the conservatives and the mainstream (Rubio straddling the latter two). If all the mainstream candidates drop out pre-Super Tuesday then that still leaves Rubio a path.HYUFD said:
Given no Republican since 1976 has won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire and only one Democrat Bill Clinton has and he won South Carolina, I would suggest third in the Palmetto State will effectively kill off Rubio even if he staggers on until Trump beats him in Florida, his home state. It is a Trump v Cruz battle now and this poll confirms itdavid_herdson said:
Yes, OK, perhaps 'excellent' is over-egging it a bit. Decent enough to keep him in the game as a contender might be better. You're right that third-fifth-third isn't an ideal start.HYUFD said:
Yes another third place triumph for Rubio in that poll just 12 points behind Trump and 6 behind Cruz. Nothing is going to stop Marco now!!!!david_herdson said:US GOP race update - SC poll (maybe)
Just seen this article tweeted:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sc-poll-trump-32-cruz-26-rubio-20-bush-10/article/2001032#.Vry62hQOPt8.twitter
If that's right and those are Wednesday numbers, then that's an excellent score for Rubio and a shocker for Trump (in as far as any first place can be a shocker). To that end, they do have the feel of being pre-debate never mind pre-NH poll data - but that's not what it says.
Caveat emptor and all that.
Can't see it myself. Mainstream or not, 'robot' will stick.0 -
I have a theory that negative interest rates are sucking money from the financial system.rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.0 -
Have you seen what I posted bellow?HYUFD said:
Given Trump and Cruz have well over 50% between them even if all the mainstream candidates rallied behind Rubio he would still most likely lose. It is about as likely to succeed as the great 'Burnham-Cooper-Kendall' alliance did in thwarting Corbyn!david_herdson said:
Although NH and Iowa threw up acceptable candidates between them. Neither Cruz nor Trump is anywhere near ideal for a lot of people. At the moment it's still a three way split between Trump, the conservatives and the mainstream (Rubio straddling the latter two). If all the mainstream candidates drop out pre-Super Tuesday then that still leaves Rubio a path.HYUFD said:
Given no Republican since 1976 has won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire and only one Democrat Bill Clinton has and he won South Carolina, I would suggest third in the Palmetto State will effectively kill off Rubio even if he staggers on until Trump beats him in Florida, his home state. It is a Trump v Cruz battle now and this poll confirms itdavid_herdson said:
Yes, OK, perhaps 'excellent' is over-egging it a bit. Decent enough to keep him in the game as a contender might be better. You're right that third-fifth-third isn't an ideal start.HYUFD said:
Yes another third place triumph for Rubio in that poll just 12 points behind Trump and 6 behind Cruz. Nothing is going to stop Marco now!!!!david_herdson said:US GOP race update - SC poll (maybe)
Just seen this article tweeted:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sc-poll-trump-32-cruz-26-rubio-20-bush-10/article/2001032#.Vry62hQOPt8.twitter
If that's right and those are Wednesday numbers, then that's an excellent score for Rubio and a shocker for Trump (in as far as any first place can be a shocker). To that end, they do have the feel of being pre-debate never mind pre-NH poll data - but that's not what it says.
Caveat emptor and all that.
Can't see it myself. Mainstream or not, 'robot' will stick.
"How did I miss this?
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 18h18 hours ago
Polling #SouthCarolina tonight - prelim results show @realDonaldTrump with yuge lead - full results tomorrow night #SCPrimary
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 16h16 hours ago
Prelim results also show massive battle for 2nd in #SouthCarolina #SCPrimary
Looks like a repeat of New Hampshire."
So lets say that South Carolina will be a repeat of New Hampshire, then what happens?0 -
Right, to win, Bush would need 2nd in South Carolina (which means beating Cruz and Rubio), then double down into Super Tuesday, knock Cruz out, then take on Trump.
0 -
Those were my words. Tbh, I think anyone backing him at 7/1 is barmy.Mortimer said:
Agreed.rcs1000 said:
I think Rubio is finished. That debate performance will haunt him forever. It's over for him.Casino_Royale said:I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!
Bush could potentially benefit. But time is running out. He needs Rubio to crash and burn so spectacularly over the next three weeks, that he is in a position to win Florida - the first winner takes all state. And with 99 delegates, this puts him right back into contention.
It's a long-shot (25-1) for things to play out that way for Bush, but it is possible.
I've been very suspicious of the 'you can't lay too much Bush' theory that has been popular in these parts this year.
He might be a 20/1 or 25/1 shot but he's a shite candidate and his millions have got him nowhere, so I'm not expecting anything to change now. Why would it?0 -
A strongly establishment candidate on either side would (in my view) mean that Bloomberg couldn't win.stodge said:Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?
In a Sanders vs Trump fight though who knows!
He's only around 30/1 to be Next President on betfair. That's sort of amazing.0 -
Paddy Power
Good bet in Lazio vs Verona at 7.45 tonight
Lucas Biglia FGS 18/1 ew
Think he is on pens
EDIT: 18/1 FGS 13/2 anytime is better than ew, I make him 11/1 and 7/20 -
Just done a YG VI
Loads of Qs about Corbyn and his successor.
None about Dave and his successor.0 -
If Rubio gets 2nd his price goes crazy.0
-
A PPP national poll had Deez Nuts (fictional candidate) getting 10% , Bloomberg getting 11%, that says a lot.Omnium said:
A strongly establishment candidate on either side would (in my view) mean that Bloomberg couldn't win.stodge said:Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?
In a Sanders vs Trump fight though who knows!
He's only around 30/1 to be Next President on betfair. That's sort of amazing.0 -
Well, not so much fictional candidate as joke candidate.Speedy said:
A PPP national poll had Deez Nuts (fictional candidate) getting 10% , Bloomberg getting 11%, that says a lot.Omnium said:
A strongly establishment candidate on either side would (in my view) mean that Bloomberg couldn't win.stodge said:Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?
In a Sanders vs Trump fight though who knows!
He's only around 30/1 to be Next President on betfair. That's sort of amazing.0 -
I know Mr. Royale - I don't mean to dig - I like the phrase, but not the betting sentiment.Casino_Royale said:
Those were my words. Tbh, I think anyone backing him at 7/1 is barmy.Mortimer said:
Agreed.rcs1000 said:
I think Rubio is finished. That debate performance will haunt him forever. It's over for him.Casino_Royale said:I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!
Bush could potentially benefit. But time is running out. He needs Rubio to crash and burn so spectacularly over the next three weeks, that he is in a position to win Florida - the first winner takes all state. And with 99 delegates, this puts him right back into contention.
It's a long-shot (25-1) for things to play out that way for Bush, but it is possible.
I've been very suspicious of the 'you can't lay too much Bush' theory that has been popular in these parts this year.
He might be a 20/1 or 25/1 shot but he's a shite candidate and his millions have got him nowhere, so I'm not expecting anything to change now. Why would it?
But seriously, whatever you think of the merits of backing him, I think laying Bush at anything above 7-1 is barmy given his deep pockets and the current state of the Republican party.0 -
Into cash deposits?Speedy said:
I have a theory that negative interest rates are sucking money from the financial system.rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.
This would show in one of the Msomething money supply measures, wouldn't it?
0 -
At the start line it seems that Rubio, Bush, Kasich, Cruz and Carson will battle for a poor second finish in S.Carolina.Alistair said:If Rubio gets 2nd his price goes crazy.
Any of them could land from 2nd to 6th with around 10-15% each.
It will be like playing russian roulette, the guy who ends up behind Bush and Cruz gets it, unless Bush and Cruz end up 5th and 6th in that case they get it.0 -
Ed Miliband an option?bigjohnowls said:Just done a YG VI
Loads of Qs about Corbyn and his successor.
None about Dave and his successor.0 -
Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.0 -
It’s official: NHS in England breaches the 18 week standard for first time in December0
-
I am SHOCKED.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.0 -
They'd have got strike-and-a-half if they'd held one on Saturdays
RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Do toes would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.0 -
I've backed Fox at small stakes at 70/1, think it was about a fortnight ago. But I can't see him going all the way; he is too factional.Danny565 said:By the way, there has been surprisingly little comment on PB about the fact Liam Fox is now Tory activists' top choice for next leader
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/fox-tops-our-next-leader-poll-but-with-the-joint-lowest-frontrunner-share-on-record.html
Even though it might be tempting to assume posters on a dedicated party website might be more radical than the average activist, it's worth remembering that the Labourlist surveys early on in the Lab leadership contest correctly predicted Corbynmania.
As I've said on here a few times before the most prominent mainstream Tory that comes out for Leave is in a good position for the next leadership election, particularly if they have the bollocks to do it early.
I think May is probably a busted flush, now, but I'm watching Gove, Boris, Hammond like a hawk. I'm also interested in what Hunt and Javid do. I have a couple of other interesting long shots too.
I'm also surprised Paterson's profile has been so low, particularly since he's very definitely a Leave.
I might kickstart my blog again with something about this.0 -
The money will go onto candidates that look like winning.Mortimer said:
I know Mr. Royale - I don't mean to dig - I like the phrase, but not the betting sentiment.Casino_Royale said:
Those were my words. Tbh, I think anyone backing him at 7/1 is barmy.Mortimer said:
Agreed.rcs1000 said:
I think Rubio is finished. That debate performance will haunt him forever. It's over for him.Casino_Royale said:I'm ignoring that Rubio doing ok poll.
I'm selling both Bush and Rubio now and focussing on Trump and Cruz. Hoping I'm ok!
Bush could potentially benefit. But time is running out. He needs Rubio to crash and burn so spectacularly over the next three weeks, that he is in a position to win Florida - the first winner takes all state. And with 99 delegates, this puts him right back into contention.
It's a long-shot (25-1) for things to play out that way for Bush, but it is possible.
I've been very suspicious of the 'you can't lay too much Bush' theory that has been popular in these parts this year.
He might be a 20/1 or 25/1 shot but he's a shite candidate and his millions have got him nowhere, so I'm not expecting anything to change now. Why would it?
But seriously, whatever you think of the merits of backing him, I think laying Bush at anything above 7-1 is barmy given his deep pockets and the current state of the Republican party.
The best Bush can hope for is to go into Super Tuesday in third, deal a big blow to Rubio there and bounce back to take Florida. That is an enormous ask, not an 12% chance.0 -
Why keep money at a bank if it costs you?Mortimer said:
Into cash deposits?Speedy said:
I have a theory that negative interest rates are sucking money from the financial system.rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.
This would show in one of the Msomething money supply measures, wouldn't it?
People and corporations have an incentive to keep their money outside of the financial system as much as possible, it's a reverse from the 70's when people where desperate to get their cash into banks as soon as possible.
Deflation and negative interest rates result in weird but rational behavior.0 -
I've got you beat, I am both shocked AND appalled.Mortimer said:
I am SHOCKED.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
0 -
[Deleted]0
-
But in reality there are no negative interests on domestic/commercial depositors cash, are there?Speedy said:
Why keep money at a bank if it costs you?Mortimer said:
Into cash deposits?Speedy said:
I have a theory that negative interest rates are sucking money from the financial system.rcs1000 said:
What's fascinating about this sell-off, is that in US dollar terms, pretty much all the major markets (except Italy) are down 12-14%. So, the FTSE-100 is down 13%, the S&P500 down 12%, the CAC down 12%, the DAX down 14%, the Nikkei down 13%.stodge said:Evening all
Another rout of a day in the financial markets - is that the FTSE now down 10% since the start of the year ? No one seems that concerned with oil dropping into the high 20s in dollar terms.
I've read some interesting bits and pieces about interest rates staying low until 2019 and what will happen when they go up (and a generation unused to rates above 0.5%).
Yet at the moment no one seems concerned.
That they are all down *almost exactly* the same amount suggests to some extent that there is some external factor driving the drops. Normally you'd say: Eurozone solvency pushed the US to outperform, or concerns about the oil sector drove the US down relative to Europe, etc.
As an aside, the DAX is now on 10x earnings, and the IBEX and MIB are also sub 11x. The UK is about the most expensive major index on 15x earnings, because we have lots of big oil & gas and miners, who are making very little money right now.
This would show in one of the Msomething money supply measures, wouldn't it?
People and corporations have an incentive to keep their money outside of the financial system as much as possible, it's a reverse from the 70's when people where desperate to get their cash into banks as soon as possible.
Deflation and negative interest rates result in weird but rational behavior.
And if there were, wouldn't it encourage investment in equities?0 -
What is the relative pay rate for weekend work in Australia?Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
0 -
Casino_Royale said:
I've backed Fox at small stakes at 70/1, think it was about a fortnight ago. But I can't see him going all the way; he is too factional.Danny565 said:By the way, there has been surprisingly little comment on PB about the fact Liam Fox is now Tory activists' top choice for next leader
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/02/fox-tops-our-next-leader-poll-but-with-the-joint-lowest-frontrunner-share-on-record.html
Even though it might be tempting to assume posters on a dedicated party website might be more radical than the average activist, it's worth remembering that the Labourlist surveys early on in the Lab leadership contest correctly predicted Corbynmania.
As I've said on here a few times before the most prominent mainstream Tory that comes out for Leave is in a good position for the next leadership election, particularly if they have the bollocks to do it early.
I think May is probably a busted flush, now, but I'm watching Gove, Boris, Hammond like a hawk. I'm also interested in what Hunt and Javid do. I have a couple of other interesting long shots too.
I'm also surprised Paterson's profile has been so low, particularly since he's very definitely a Leave.
I might kickstart my blog again with something about this.
I've backed so many long odds Tory leader possibles over the years that I forget who I have - but I'm in total agreement re: Fox.
The Tory party would split before they back Fox. He is a busted flush. Like Davies.0 -
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot0 -
It will not be an exact repeat, likely Trump first then Cruz, not Kasich, then those two will be the final two standing, with Trump winning but Cruz likely closing the gap as every other contendor drops outSpeedy said:
Have you seen what I posted bellow?HYUFD said:
Given Trump and Cruz have well over 50% between them even if all the mainstream candidates rallied behind Rubio he would still most likely lose. It is about as likely to succeed as the great 'Burnham-Cooper-Kendall' alliance did in thwarting Corbyn!david_herdson said:
Although NH and Iowa threw up acceptable candidates between them. Neither Cruz nor Trump is anywhere near ideal for a lot of people. At the moment it's still a three way split between Trump, the conservatives and the mainstream (Rubio straddling the latter two). If all the mainstream candidates drop out pre-Super Tuesday then that still leaves Rubio a path.HYUFD said:
Given no Republican since 1976 has won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire and only one Democrat Bill Clinton has and he won South Carolina, I would suggest third in the Palmetto State will effectively kill off Rubio even if he staggers on until Trump beats him in Florida, his home state. It is a Trump v Cruz battle now and this poll confirms itdavid_herdson said:
Yes, OK, perhaps 'excellent' is over-egging it a bit. Decent enough to keep him in the game as a contender might be better. You're right that third-fifth-third isn't an ideal start.HYUFD said:
Yes another third place triumph for Rubio in that poll just 12 points behind Trump and 6 behind Cruz. Nothing is going to stop Marco now!!!!david_herdson said:US GOP race update - SC poll (maybe)
Just seen this article tweeted:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/sc-poll-trump-32-cruz-26-rubio-20-bush-10/article/2001032#.Vry62hQOPt8.twitter
If that's right and those are Wednesday numbers, then that's an excellent score for Rubio and a shocker for Trump (in as far as any first place can be a shocker). To that end, they do have the feel of being pre-debate never mind pre-NH poll data - but that's not what it says.
Caveat emptor and all that.
Can't see it myself. Mainstream or not, 'robot' will stick.
"How did I miss this?
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 18h18 hours ago
Polling #SouthCarolina tonight - prelim results show @realDonaldTrump with yuge lead - full results tomorrow night #SCPrimary
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 16h16 hours ago
Prelim results also show massive battle for 2nd in #SouthCarolina #SCPrimary
Looks like a repeat of New Hampshire."
So lets say that South Carolina will be a repeat of New Hampshire, then what happens?0 -
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot0 -
Does Australia want any more Docs?perdix said:
What is the relative pay rate for weekend work in Australia?Razedabode said:I do wonder if the good will shown to junior doctors will continue. They seem to be waving "save our nhs" placards around whilst resigning or threatening to go to Australia.
Will they get Visas?
Are MC employees likely to uproot their families and leave protected employment?
These are all more pertinent questions.0 -
That's a buy on the rumour poll if ever I saw one.Speedy said:How did I miss this?
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 18h18 hours ago
Polling #SouthCarolina tonight - prelim results show @realDonaldTrump with yuge lead - full results tomorrow night #SCPrimary
Opinion Savvy @Opinion_Savvy 16h16 hours ago
Prelim results also show massive battle for 2nd in #SouthCarolina #SCPrimary
Looks like a repeat of New Hampshire.
I've just put another small splodge on The Donald.0 -
The reason emergency specialisms are incentiveised at the moment is because they work ridiculous hours. We have to get away from that system and onto one which incentivises the specialisms themselves, which is what the government wants to do.RobD said:
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot0 -
Presumably there are far fewer specialist roles?RobD said:
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot
Whilst there are far more emergency medicine roles?
And it is presumably only an effective pay cut because of the current generous pay for 'antisocial hours' and weekend work?
0 -
There is a recruitment problem in A&E, you know, probably the most critical speciality for part isn't safety.RobD said:
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot
How is cutting their pay going to solve the recruitment problem and increase patient safety?
Paying people more to work the unpopular safety critical jobs is the obvious free market solution to the problem, Why are right wingers so against it?0 -
It's only a pay cut as they are working ridiculous hours. I agree that there needs to be a recruiting drive to address this.Mortimer said:
Presumably there are far fewer specialist roles?RobD said:
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot
Whilst there are far more emergency medicine roles?
And it is presumably only an effective pay cut because of the current generous pay for 'antisocial hours' and weekend work?0 -
They are not cutting pay, they are cutting hours. I think I'd be more tempted to work in the field if I wasn't required to work God-awful shifts.Alistair said:
There is a recruitment problem in A&E, you know, probably the most critical speciality for part isn't safety.RobD said:
So all that talk about the reduction in hours worked being a risk to patient safety was a worry about nothing. In the end it has come down to how much they are being paid, and I bet the Doctors do better out of their deal than Hunt's otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it.bigjohnowls said:
They are asking for a basic pay 10% lower than Hunt is imposing. Their proposal costs the same as the current contract ie its cost neutral. It meets the 7 day NHS requirements was accepted by employers vetoed by Hunt.RobD said:Reading in the telegraph that the Doctors would call off their action if the 11% basic pay rise was reduced in favour of more generous Saturday wages (although, anecdote alert, I've only ever got better pay for working on Sundays, never Saturdays).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/12151653/Jeremy-Hunt-poised-to-force-through-junior-doctors-contract.html
Shows it was never about patient safety, just money.
The imposed contract gives Drs who work in specialties like Dermatology a 13% pay rise but cuts pay ib specialties like A%E a 20% pat cut.
Guess which already has a recruitment problem and which is oversubscribed?
Hunt is a complete idiot
How is cutting their pay going to solve the recruitment problem and increase patient safety?
Paying people more to work the unpopular safety critical jobs is the obvious free market solution to the problem, Why are right wingers so against it?0 -
All the nice things you can find about GOP candidates on youtube that you never knew.
Here John Kasich as the extremist right winger FOX News presenter, who makes Ted Cruz look moderate, of not exactly the most excellent show on earth :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzG7l5P9wO80 -
Kasich needs this to go viral to boost his South Carolina chancesSpeedy said:All the nice things you can find about GOP candidates on youtube that you never knew.
Here John Kasich as the extremist right winger FOX News presenter, who makes Ted Cruz look moderate, of not exactly the most excellent show on earth :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzG7l5P9wO8
0 -
@jameskirkup: Dear @TheBMA , why is it safe for Drs to work Saturday if they get unsocial hours premium, but unsafe without? Does more pay boost safety?0
-
Why didn't Bush use all that in N.Hampshire?Pulpstar said:
Kasich needs this to go viral to boost his South Carolina chancesSpeedy said:All the nice things you can find about GOP candidates on youtube that you never knew.
Here John Kasich as the extremist right winger FOX News presenter, who makes Ted Cruz look moderate, of not exactly the most excellent show on earth :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzG7l5P9wO8
Probably because he was busy beating Rubio.0 -
Adam Johnson sacked by Sunderland after child sex charge admission
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/35546894
Wonder if we will see the same kind of mob behaviour as with Ched Evans?0 -
-
There is a rather amusing recent episode of the good wife, where the husband is standing for Democract nomination and he goes to Iowa and has to eat a meat sandwich in each of many towns he vists as part of a whirlwind trip and the media catch him spitting it out in one and it sinks his whole campaign.Scott_P said:0 -
http://buchanan.org/blog/bloomberg-vs-trump-124741Omnium said:
A strongly establishment candidate on either side would (in my view) mean that Bloomberg couldn't win.stodge said:Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?
In a Sanders vs Trump fight though who knows!
He's only around 30/1 to be Next President on betfair. That's sort of amazing.
The morning of the New Hampshire primary, Donald Trump, being interviewed on “Morning Joe,” said that he would welcome his “friend” Michael Bloomberg into the presidential race.
Which is probably the understatement of 2016.
By spending a billion dollars, Bloomberg could blanket the nation with ads. But once Republican oppo research groups defined him for Middle America, perhaps 4 in 5 of his votes would come out of the basket upon which Democrats rely.
For example, as a Jewish-American, Bloomberg might do well in the Dade-Broward-Palm Beach County corridor, taking votes that Clinton or Sanders would need to carry Florida. Yet, where would Bloomberg get the rest of his votes to win the Sunshine State?
Clearly, Bloomberg is envious of the success of the Donald, since he descended on that escalator at Trump Towers on June 16.
The problem for Bloomberg is that, while this is the year of the outsider, with populist revolts breaking out in both parties, Sanders and Trump caught the lightning early, while he was restructuring his media empire. And, to be candid, Michael Bloomberg is no barn burner.
So all together now: “Run, Mike, Run!”0 -
Well, given he's been sacked by Sunderland, and I'd imagine not many clubs will want to be associated with him, no. But somehow I don't see either Adam Johnson or Ched Evans as victims in their situations.FrancisUrquhart said:Adam Johnson sacked by Sunderland after child sex charge admission
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/35546894
Wonder if we will see the same kind of mob behaviour as with Ched Evans?0 -
Oooh, that means it's TITLE TIME again.AlastairMeeks said:
"It is important to ascertain, before the qualifying insolvency event, whether there are any former employers who have not been discharged from liability—and it is amazing how often this step has been overlooked in practice. Trustees should ensure that the companies in question are discharged before the PPF assessment period, for example by the trustees investigating the financial position of the employer and concluding that any debt due from it falls under the third bullet point above."SeanT said:
Oh go on. It's fun. We're chillaxing.AlastairMeeks said:
Trust me, I really don't!LucyJones said:
Oh, go on! You know you want to.AlastairMeeks said:By coincidence, I too have handed in a draft for a book today. I won't trouble the thread with the penultimate paragraph.
No chemical compounds are involved. There's some fairly dry law.
One day I'll write my seminal science fiction study of time travel (the pen name "antifrank" will be revived if I do) but till then my creative writing will be confined to pb.
The Bankrupt Uncle
The Frozen Company
The Insolvent Stepbrother
Actually, scratch the third one, apparently Step- never sells.0 -
Downing Street said today that the four demands were "fully intact". Even though the fourth demand says clearly "people coming to Britain from the EU must live here and contribute for four years before they qualify for in-work benefits or social housing. And that we should end the practice of sending child benefit overseas."
Of course neither of these things happen in the memo, certainly not "fully". No 10 is just clearly telling untruths now.0 -
I'm still not convinced by this idea that Bloomberg would ONLY hurt Democrats.LondonBob said:
http://buchanan.org/blog/bloomberg-vs-trump-124741Omnium said:
A strongly establishment candidate on either side would (in my view) mean that Bloomberg couldn't win.stodge said:Just watching GOPTV (sorry, Fox News). Carried two polls showing Bloomberg on 15% in match ups with Trump/Sanders or Cruz/Sanders.
Is it our considered view that Bloomberg will only enter if Trump/Cruz is the GOP nominee and Sanders the Dem nominee ?
In a Sanders vs Trump fight though who knows!
He's only around 30/1 to be Next President on betfair. That's sort of amazing.
The morning of the New Hampshire primary, Donald Trump, being interviewed on “Morning Joe,” said that he would welcome his “friend” Michael Bloomberg into the presidential race.
Which is probably the understatement of 2016.
By spending a billion dollars, Bloomberg could blanket the nation with ads. But once Republican oppo research groups defined him for Middle America, perhaps 4 in 5 of his votes would come out of the basket upon which Democrats rely.
For example, as a Jewish-American, Bloomberg might do well in the Dade-Broward-Palm Beach County corridor, taking votes that Clinton or Sanders would need to carry Florida. Yet, where would Bloomberg get the rest of his votes to win the Sunshine State?
Clearly, Bloomberg is envious of the success of the Donald, since he descended on that escalator at Trump Towers on June 16.
The problem for Bloomberg is that, while this is the year of the outsider, with populist revolts breaking out in both parties, Sanders and Trump caught the lightning early, while he was restructuring his media empire. And, to be candid, Michael Bloomberg is no barn burner.
So all together now: “Run, Mike, Run!”
While the white working-class make up a big part of the Republicans' voters these days, there is still a fairly substantial "country club" element to their voters (fiscally conservative/socially liberal-ish) which Bloomberg could take from Trump.0 -
There are several aspects to this. The contract removes a lot of the protections separate from the pay aspect. Less monitoring and reduced penalties means that Employers are more inclined to break the rules.Scott_P said:@jameskirkup: Dear @TheBMA , why is it safe for Drs to work Saturday if they get unsocial hours premium, but unsafe without? Does more pay boost safety?
The second part is financial incentives. If it costs a Trust more to roster people for unsocial hours, then they will not do it lightly.
The cost of working unsocial hours is also higher. Try getting childcare for a 1200 to 2200 shift on a Saturday, and increasingly Doctors are working mothers. If the rotas are intolerable many will be forced to take career breaks, rather than work them.
I set the rotas for our department as one of my roles. Interestingly at no time has anyone at any management level asked me to roster more people on at weekends.0
