Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another PB betting tip comes good

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited June 2013 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Another PB betting tip comes good

Last Thursday I urged everybody to get on 3/1 that Ladbrokes was offering that George Osborne would be called Jeffrey in the Commons before the end of the year.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013
    Hadn't Osbrowne already been called Jeffrey in the commons?

    EDIT: You did highlight this Mr Smithson but I wasn't sure about who it was.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Mick_Pork said:

    Hadn't Osbrowne had already been called Jeffrey?

    Yes - Angela Eagle (IIRC) - but that was before Ladbrokes opened the market.

    FPT:

    a devolved government can only ameliorate the problem.

    But it hasn't ameliorated the problem - life expectancy has got relatively worse under devolution.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    Has Liam Byrne been called Zippy in Parliament yet?

    :)
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    Hadn't Osbrowne had already been called Jeffrey?

    Yes - Angela Eagle (IIRC) - but that was before Ladbrokes opened the market.

    FPT:

    a devolved government can only ameliorate the problem.

    But it hasn't ameliorated the problem - life expectancy has got relatively worse under devolution.
    Yes, that was who I was thinking of.

    That you don't understand the popularity of Devolution even with the limited powers it has (and the clear public desire in scotland for more powers that recognises and underlines the limited nature of them) is only to be expected.

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    I presume even you know you're talking garbage, Carlotta, but as a matter of interest, what would you attribute the worse Scottish life expectancy figures since the 1950s to? It can't be devolution, because that didn't start until 1999, and yet we all know it can't possibly be London's fault. Heaven forbid. Maybe it's something to do with the Church of Scotland?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    @james kelly

    Of course what we do know from you is nothing is ever the fault of the SNP. Life will be utopian under the SNP.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Mr Hodges does have a very witty turn of phrase http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100223340/let-the-mad-left-have-a-general-strike-itll-keep-them-happy-and-the-rest-of-us-will-get-a-nice-long-weekend/

    "On Saturday, however, at that gathering of the cream of the ultra-Left that was the People’s Assembly Against Austerity, calls for a new conflict to purify the soul of the nation were everywhere. Of course being self-styled progressives, they weren’t actually demanding a war as such. No, what they were after was the industrial equivalent – a General Strike.

    Speaker after speaker rose to demand it. What did they want? A General Strike. When did they want one? Yesterday.

    In fact, it became such a ritual it was a bit like attending a meeting of General Strikers Anonymous. “Hi, I’m Mark Serwotka, and I’m a striker. I haven’t had a General Strike since 1926.” “Hi, Mark.”

    Of course those that had assembled weren’t trying to confront their demons, but release them. They’d fallen off the General Strike wagon, and had absolutely no intention of clambering back on..."
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Of course what we do know from you is nothing is ever the fault of the SNP. Life will be utopian under the SNP."

    Link?
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    @JK

    Don't need one, its there for everyone to see in pretty much everything you post.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    "But today at Treasury Questions Labour’s AB’s Anas Sarwar also used the Jeffrey word"

    Do we think Mr Sarwar had a few quid on it being mentioned? ;)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    "Of course what we do know from you is nothing is ever the fault of the SNP. Life will be utopian under the SNP."

    Link?

    Like is already utopian under the SNP surely ?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Don't need one"

    In other words you haven't got one. Moving on...
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Maybe its just the shit diet and lifestyle and the inability to change it..So it must be the Westminster gang to blame..what rubbish
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    I presume even you know you're talking garbage, Carlotta, but as a matter of interest, what would you attribute the worse Scottish life expectancy figures since the 1950s to? It can't be devolution, because that didn't start until 1999, and yet we all know it can't possibly be London's fault. Heaven forbid. Maybe it's something to do with the Church of Scotland?

    No I don't think its London's fault. I think its the fault of Scottish people.

    Obesity, alcoholism, smoking etc aren't caused by London. They're caused by individuals themselves.

    Our own behaviour has tremendous impact on our own lives.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Like is already utopian under the SNP surely ?"

    Like is very much utopian under the SNP. Dislike is somewhat less fun.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    edited June 2013
    Wouldn't be surprised if Ladbrokes put up ricks like this just so Mike backs them and they get a load of inexpensive publicity. They only let him have £33 at 3s then cut it to 6/4!
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "No I don't think its London's fault. I think its the fault of Scottish people."

    I've got to hand it to you guys, you're good value. We don't even have to set traps for you!
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    "Like is already utopian under the SNP surely ?"

    Like is very much utopian under the SNP. Dislike is somewhat less fun.

    Dislike is surely illegal under the SNP - unless it's English cheddar you are talking about.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    "No I don't think its London's fault. I think its the fault of Scottish people."

    I've got to hand it to you guys, you're good value. We don't even have to set traps for you!

    "You people"? I'm a normal citizen not a politician so don't need to mess around and am just saying it as it is.

    You think London causes high levels of smoking, obesity, alcoholism etc rather than the individuals responsible themselves? Or do you think people are responsible for their own actions?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    FPT

    "Nice try. That was pre-Mutually Assured Destruction and nearly 70 years ago."

    Westminster Abbey was built almost a thousand years ago. Philip Thompson conclusion : it's impossible to build abbeys.

    If you can correlate Westminster Abbey into a form of Mutually Assured Destruction then yes. If not then no.
    Philip: I've got to say, the Cosmati floor comes pretty close...

    http://static.westminster-abbey.org/assets/thumbnail/0019/23068/Cosmati-floor-detail-coloured-star-pattern-72-Westminster-Abbey-copyright.jpg
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    ""You people"? I'm a normal citizen not a politician"

    It was "you guys" actually, but let's not quibble. I certainly wasn't suggesting you are a politician - I was suggesting you are a PB Tory. I'll leave you to judge whether that's better or worse.

    So let's hear your theory as to why so many people who make "bad decisions" just happen to be concentrated in one particular geographical area. Genes? Weather? Or is it all just a TOTAL MYSTERY?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    ""You people"? I'm a normal citizen not a politician"

    It was "you guys" actually, but let's not quibble. I certainly wasn't suggesting you are a politician - I was suggesting you are a PB Tory. I'll leave you to judge whether that's better or worse.

    So let's hear your theory as to why so many people who make "bad decisions" just happen to be concentrated in one particular geographical area. Genes? Weather? Or is it all just a TOTAL MYSTERY?

    Looking at Wales, the North and Scotland - is the answer "predominantly ruled by leftists ?"
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    ""You people"? I'm a normal citizen not a politician"

    It was "you guys" actually, but let's not quibble. I certainly wasn't suggesting you are a politician - I was suggesting you are a PB Tory. I'll leave you to judge whether that's better or worse.

    So let's hear your theory as to why so many people who make "bad decisions" just happen to be concentrated in one particular geographical area. Genes? Weather? Or is it all just a TOTAL MYSTERY?

    Friends, family and peer pressure etc versus a city on the other side of our island?

    I'm going to go with friends, family and peer pressure etc ... you?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Looking at Wales, the North and Scotland - is the answer "predominantly ruled by leftists ?""

    Between 1979 and 1997? Hmmm. Try again.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges does have a very witty turn of phrase

    There's no one finer at oblivious self-parody and idiot predictions, well, apart from the odd 'serial labour voting' tory spinner. ;^ )

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    Wimbledon: Laura Robson wins in straight sets against Russian 10th seed Maria Kirilenko!!
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Friends, family and peer pressure etc versus a city on the other side of our island?"

    By "city on the other side of our island" I presume you mean "the government"? Yes, I think it's likely to be the government.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    "Looking at Wales, the North and Scotland - is the answer "predominantly ruled by leftists ?""

    Between 1979 and 1997? Hmmm. Try again.

    I'd imagine smoking levels were lower in 1997 than 1979 in Scotland.
  • Mick_Pork said:

    Plato said:

    Mr Hodges does have a very witty turn of phrase

    There's no one finer at oblivious self-parody and idiot predictions, well, apart from the odd 'serial labour voting' tory spinner. ;^ )

    That's a bit harsh on Hodges. Sure, everything he writes ends up as "Ed is crap", but there's no doubt that the lad can write and craft a narrative. He just needs to get over the fact that Blair is gone.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    TGOHF said:

    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?

    Considerably more.
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2h

    Well, @AnasSarwar's Jeffrey Osborne joke has cost @Ladbrokes £10,000 in the biggest ever political novelty payout.

  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    edited June 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?

    Considerably more.
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2h

    Well, @AnasSarwar's Jeffrey Osborne joke has cost @Ladbrokes £10,000 in the biggest ever political novelty payout.


    I'd like to see the proof of that

    They might have taken £4k at 6/4 meaning a payout of £10k, but no way would they lay to lose £10k. Mike got £33@3/1
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    He just needs to get over the fact that Blair is gone.

    Hodges getting over the departure of the Sainted Tony?? A somewhat unlikely proposition. ;)

    I expect he'll be first in the queue for this.
    John Rentoul ‏@JohnRentoul 1h

    Order your e-book or paperback of the new edition of my biography of Tony Blair, with 20k-word Afterword & Sayings Of http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/06/20/tony-blair-on-balance-a-good-prime-minister/
    The ultra Blairites have a talent at self-promotion only eclipsed by the promotion of their hero.


  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    "Is it all a total mystery?" It would appear to be to citizens of Scotland.Let me try and solve it for you.If you overeat.over drink, smoke and under excercise then it will impact, seriously ,on your health and probably shorten your life expectancy.Most people in the western world seem to know that except the folk in Scotland. Why?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    "Looking at Wales, the North and Scotland - is the answer "predominantly ruled by leftists ?""

    Predominantly returning leftists to government would be more accurate.

    as a general rule, the longer a leftist has been returned, the bigger a khazi the constituency is, basically (see the BBC's article on Blaenau Gwent today). Fortunes thrown at it since the mines closed, and yet its still a shrinking broken down toilet of a place.

    When constituencies grow and become prosperous, they tend to vote tory.

    So it really is in labour's interest to keep as many constituencies as poor as possible for as long as possible.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013
    isam said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?

    Considerably more.
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2h

    Well, @AnasSarwar's Jeffrey Osborne joke has cost @Ladbrokes £10,000 in the biggest ever political novelty payout.
    I'd like to see the proof of that

    They might have taken £4k at 6/4 meaning a payout of £10k, but no way would they lay to lose £10k. Mike got £33@3/1


    You'd best tell everyone else who's running with it because it certainly isn't just Waugh.

    Perhaps instead of a conspiracy it may just be that they aren't infallible and this was a pretty strange bet considering how likely it was that someone would have a pop at 'Jeffrey'.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited June 2013
    "If you overeat.over drink, smoke and under excercise then it will impact"

    But WHY are people more likely to over-drink, smoke and under-exercise in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK? Do you have a plausible explanation that doesn't involve the way that Scotland has been misruled by the UK government?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "So it really is in labour's interest to keep as many constituencies as poor as possible for as long as possible."

    And the explanation for the gap always widening between rich and poor under the Tories is...?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    "If you overeat.over drink, smoke and under excercise then it will impact"

    But WHY are people more likely to over-drink, smoke and under-exercise in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK? Do you have a plausible explanation that doesn't involve the way that Scotland has been misruled by the UK government?

    Yes the only one available: The actions of Scottish people.

    The UK government is responsible for the UK as a whole, unless you can identify actions the UK government has taken against Scotland but not the rest of the UK the variable is the people.

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Yes the only one available: The actions of Scottish people."

    Explain why the Scottish people act differently to people elsewhere in the UK, Philip.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Next Scottish Parliamentary by election ?
    Bill Walker MSP for Dunfermline elected as SNP since expelled was in court today facing 24 charges of assaulting 4 women over a 28 year period . Trial hearing was set for July 8th .
    Result in 2011 SNP 11010 Lab 10420 Lib Dem 5776 Con 2093 SNP gain from notional Lib Dem 2007 seat with a majority over Labour of 77 .
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    This is going to get very, very, very ugly and it wasn't exactly pretty already.
    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 26s

    London police secretly bugged meetings with murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence's friend Duwayne Brooks, BBC told http://bbc.in/147vBl5
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Hehe..so they overeat, over drink, smoke and under excercise becaus of Westminster..that is just so much nonsense..Maybe Scotland is a boring place, or it rains a lot so its not nice jogging, everbody knows the dangers of smoking, thats why it is banned in enclosed spaces.The rest of the country get rain and have to go out st smoke, a lot of them jog regardless of he weather, maybe Scots are just not inclined that way.They actually like doing what they do, regardless.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    "Yes the only one available: The actions of Scottish people."

    Explain why the Scottish people act differently to people elsewhere in the UK, Philip.

    Already done so: Friends, family, peer pressure etc
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    taffys said:

    "Looking at Wales, the North and Scotland - is the answer "predominantly ruled by leftists ?""

    Predominantly returning leftists to government would be more accurate.

    as a general rule, the longer a leftist has been returned, the bigger a khazi the constituency is, basically (see the BBC's article on Blaenau Gwent today). Fortunes thrown at it since the mines closed, and yet its still a shrinking broken down toilet of a place.

    When constituencies grow and become prosperous, they tend to vote tory.

    So it really is in labour's interest to keep as many constituencies as poor as possible for as long as possible.

    Then why do they throw money at them?

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Already done so: Friends, family, peer pressure etc"

    Not good enough. WHY is 'family, friend, peer pressure etc' different in Scotland to the rest of the UK?
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    This is going to get very, very, very ugly and it wasn't exactly pretty already.

    Ugly for who? the police?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013
    taffys said:

    This is going to get very, very, very ugly and it wasn't exactly pretty already.

    Ugly for who? the police?

    For starters yes but anyone else involved in their actions.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    "If you overeat.over drink, smoke and under excercise then it will impact"

    But WHY are people more likely to over-drink, smoke and under-exercise in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK?

    A nation bloats from the head down, James.

    Salmond is too much of a roll model.

  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Mick_Pork said:

    taffys said:

    This is going to get very, very, very ugly and it wasn't exactly pretty already.

    Ugly for who? the police?

    For starters yes but anyone else involved in their actions.

    Agreed . Who was it who authorised the bugging of those meetings ?

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Iain Robinson ‏@IainSRobinson 46m

    Hogan-Howe ''unaware'' of Lawrence plot http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=23281 … via @govnews
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    edited June 2013
    Mick_Pork said:

    isam said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?

    Considerably more.
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2h

    Well, @AnasSarwar's Jeffrey Osborne joke has cost @Ladbrokes £10,000 in the biggest ever political novelty payout.
    I'd like to see the proof of that

    They might have taken £4k at 6/4 meaning a payout of £10k, but no way would they lay to lose £10k. Mike got £33@3/1
    You'd best tell everyone else who's running with it because it certainly isn't just Waugh.

    Perhaps instead of a conspiracy it may just be that they aren't infallible and this was a pretty strange bet considering how likely it was that someone would have a pop at 'Jeffrey'.


    Bookmakers always pretend they've taken more than they really have, it's the oldest PR trick in the book. Waugh is just quoting Ladbrokes press release.

    They let Mike have £33.33 to win £99.99 then moved it to 6/4. if they laid it to lose £9.9k after that they need their heads examining.

    The word payout means they gave given back £10k including the original stake, so it could be they had laid £4500@6/5 but even that is unlikely
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    tim said:

    @isam

    Ladbrokes have form on this stuff
    Remember this nonsense?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380592/Kate-Middleton-tipped-borrow-Queens-tiara-royal-wedding-72k-bet.html



    The press usually fall for it

    The £10,000 is suspiciously quote friendly but I find it hard to believe they didn't end up on the wrong side of this one and had to pay out accordingly.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    "Already done so: Friends, family, peer pressure etc"

    Not good enough. WHY is 'family, friend, peer pressure etc' different in Scotland to the rest of the UK?

    Isn't it more the case that patterns of behaviour among people living in similar circumstances across the Uk are similar? In places in England and Wales where heavy industry has declined, housing is poor, chances are limited and unemployment is high there are lower rates of life expectancy. More people may live in such circumstances in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK and so overall life expectancy is lower. That is not an inevitable consequence of the Union, though; it's about the choices people make and the support available to them. Government can obviously have an impact on the macro-economic state of a place, and I reckon you'd be on pretty sage ground if you were claiming that, and it can also decide what kind of interventions to make, again if you claimed that you'd have a strong point, but there is nothing inevitable about people choosing not to exercise, to smoke too much, drink too much and to eat unhealthily just because Scotland is a part of the UK.

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "but there is nothing inevitable about people choosing not to exercise, to smoke too much, drink too much and to eat unhealthily just because Scotland is a part of the UK"

    Nothing inevitable, but as that's what's happened we should probably draw the obvious conclusion.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    isam said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    isam said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    TGOHF said:

    I wonder how much Ladbrokes took against ? A single penny ?

    Considerably more.
    Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh 2h

    Well, @AnasSarwar's Jeffrey Osborne joke has cost @Ladbrokes £10,000 in the biggest ever political novelty payout.
    I'd like to see the proof of that

    They might have taken £4k at 6/4 meaning a payout of £10k, but no way would they lay to lose £10k. Mike got £33@3/1
    You'd best tell everyone else who's running with it because it certainly isn't just Waugh.

    Perhaps instead of a conspiracy it may just be that they aren't infallible and this was a pretty strange bet considering how likely it was that someone would have a pop at 'Jeffrey'.
    Bookmakers always pretend they've taken more than they really have, it's the oldest PR trick in the book. Waugh is just quoting Ladbrokes press release.

    They let Mike have £33.33 to win £99.99 then moved it to 6/4. if they laid it to lose £9.9k after that they need their heads examining.

    The word payout means they gave given back £10k including the original stake, so it could be they had laid £4500@6/5 but even that is unlikely

    Yes, they have their swung their PR machine into action but it was still a fairly bizarre bet that some punters would have took advantage of and I doubt they will be complaining too much.


  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Mick_Pork said:

    tim said:

    @isam

    Ladbrokes have form on this stuff
    Remember this nonsense?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380592/Kate-Middleton-tipped-borrow-Queens-tiara-royal-wedding-72k-bet.html



    The press usually fall for it

    The £10,000 is suspiciously quote friendly but I find it hard to believe they didn't end up on the wrong side of this one and had to pay out accordingly.

    Of course they are on the wrong side of it, because it happened! I don't think they were offering a price on him not to be called Jeffrey!

    What I am saying is I doubt Ladbrokes would risk losing ten grand on a market like this. They might have taken a few hundred quid.

    Bookmakers always pretend they have been beaten up by the punters because it is the best publicity possible.

    mike and tim were both on, they are obviously shrewd political bettors... Mike got £33 on, maybe tim could let us know what he got?
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    edited June 2013
    Southam Observer and James Kelly arguing... This could be a lengthy encounter decided by the finest margin ever recorded
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    I presume even you know you're talking garbage, Carlotta

    Links were posted to the data yesterday James. That must have been when you popped off to write a blog posts as your blog is the only place you are going to win this argument.... And you're the one talking garbage - and now on day two too!

  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited June 2013
    "Draw the obvious conclusin"

    that they are fat,lazy, drunkards, who really dont give a toss, pass the fags mate..where's the clicker?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    "but there is nothing inevitable about people choosing not to exercise, to smoke too much, drink too much and to eat unhealthily just because Scotland is a part of the UK"

    Nothing inevitable, but as that's what's happened we should probably draw the obvious conclusion.

    Indeed we should: that local factors (culture, etc) mean that they make different choices to compatriots in similar socio-economic circumstances elsewhere in the UK
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited June 2013
    "Links were posted to the data yesterday James. That must have been when you popped off to write a blog posts as your blog is the only place you are going to win this argument.... And you're the one talking garbage - and now on day two too!"

    Hmmm. I don't think I'm the only one who will have spotted that that's a rather unconvincing answer to the question that you mysteriously omitted from your quote -

    "as a matter of interest, what would you attribute the worse Scottish life expectancy figures since the 1950s to? It can't be devolution, because that didn't start until 1999, and yet we all know it can't possibly be London's fault. Heaven forbid. Maybe it's something to do with the Church of Scotland?"

    Feel free to try again. It seems self-evident that if your claim to truly believe that you have somehow "won this argument" is genuine, you must have an answer to that question.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    AveryLP said:

    "If you overeat.over drink, smoke and under excercise then it will impact"

    But WHY are people more likely to over-drink, smoke and under-exercise in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK?

    A nation bloats from the head down, James.

    Salmond is too much of a roll model.

    A roll and Lorne sausage model ?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I presume even you know you're talking garbage, Carlotta

    Links were posted to the data yesterday James. That must have been when you popped off to write a blog posts as your blog is the only place you are going to win this argument.... And you're the one talking garbage - and now on day two too!

    I think it's day 3...
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Indeed we should: that local factors (culture, etc) mean that they make different choices to compatriots in similar socio-economic circumstances elsewhere in the UK"

    And that 'culture etc' spontaneously emerged under the union? Why? How? In what way was the union not implicated in that phenomenon?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    isam said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    tim said:

    @isam

    Ladbrokes have form on this stuff
    Remember this nonsense?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380592/Kate-Middleton-tipped-borrow-Queens-tiara-royal-wedding-72k-bet.html



    The press usually fall for it

    The £10,000 is suspiciously quote friendly but I find it hard to believe they didn't end up on the wrong side of this one and had to pay out accordingly.

    Of course they are on the wrong side of it, because it happened! I don't think they were offering a price on him not to be called Jeffrey!

    What I am saying is I doubt Ladbrokes would risk losing ten grand on a market like this. They might have taken a few hundred quid.

    Bookmakers always pretend they have been beaten up by the punters because it is the best publicity possible.

    mike and tim were both on, they are obviously shrewd political bettors... Mike got £33 on, maybe tim could let us know what he got?
    That being the case then it would seem to be a win win win. Ladbrokes get their publicity, the press get their quote and the punters get their cash. Of course the truth might have taken a knock in the process but you and tim are highlighting that now.

    You can also both now use this as a cautionary for the next novelty political bet.
    After getting on as fast as you can to take advantage of it of course. ;)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Great video of MEPs in Brussels.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100223407/for-some-meps-the-right-to-sign-on-and-sod-off-is-worth-fighting-for/

    "f you haven't caught up with it, here's the video published by OpenEurope of MEPs signing in for their 300euros, sodding off… and thumping the journalist who dares to ask them about it (the intrepid Tom Staal of Geenstijl)."
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "I think it's day 3..."

    It's day 2. But Carlotta is indeed a gem. She thinks that all she has to do to win an argument is say "I've won an argument, didn't you notice, you silly boy?"
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688
    Anas Sarwar was really foolish to make such a comment. It would be easy to conclude (I'm sure wrongly) that he was a financial beneficiary thereby, or that perhaps he made his comment as a favour to a friend. Either way he has substantially undermined his own reputation.

    Ladbrokes are talking utter nonsense of course. If they make more that around GBP200k per year on politics I'd be surprised and they are hardly going to throw away 5% of that.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good evening, everyone.

    Huzzah for Laura Robson's victory!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    Hmmm. I don't think I'm the only one who will have spotted that that's a rather unconvincing answer

    I think you are James:

    "The UK average is 78.1 years for males and 82.1 years for females and the gap between UK and Scottish life expectancy is now wider than in 1997-1999, by 0.2 years for males and by 0.3 years for females.""

    So the gap has widened since Devolution......

    Which evil Unionist mouthpiece posted this heresy?

    The Scottish government:

    http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/stats/annual-review-2011/j21285206.htm

    So why has relative life expectancy declined under Devolution - and why would independence reverse that?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Game Set and Match to Carlotta.

    New balls required for James.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    "I've won an argument, didn't you notice, you silly boy?"

    Are you quoting your own blog again James?

    Why has relative life expectancy declined under Devolution?

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's a shame that YES2AV didn't note that sunshine levels are considerably higher in countries with AV than we endure in the UK. We might have seen a very different outcome to the AV referendum.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    "I think it's day 3..."

    It's day 2. But Carlotta is indeed a gem. She thinks that all she has to do to win an argument is say "I've won an argument, didn't you notice, you silly boy?"

    I think it started yesterday because I posted a response to a silly claim you made on Sunday night.

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion.

    You've yet to actually put up any evidence to support your claim.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited June 2013
    "So why has relative life expectancy declined under Devolution - and why would independence reverse that?"

    Once again, congratulations on correcting that factual howler you made on the previous thread. But don't worry, I'm sure no-one noticed that you claimed that life expectancy itself had declined under devolution.

    The answer to your question is contained in the blogpost I have already linked to -

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/yet-another-problem-that-london-rule.html

    Now, Carlotta. Third time of asking. What is the explanation for why Scottish life expectancy declined relative to the rest of the United Kingdom starting in the 1950s, more than four decades prior to devolution? Do you actually have an answer? I have to warn you that if you fail to address the question yet again, people are going to be reasonably conclude that you don't.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited June 2013
    THe main rationale for this site is betting on politics and at the moment there are very few opportunities. No US election, no by-elections, no leadership contests and GE2015 not for nearly two years.

    If it hadn't been for the fixed term parliament act we'd be talking about possible early elections.

    This site is at its worst when there's nothing to be bet on something that's going to be resolved within a short time.
    isam said:

    Wouldn't be surprised if Ladbrokes put up ricks like this just so Mike backs them and they get a load of inexpensive publicity. They only let him have £33 at 3s then cut it to 6/4!

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    THe main rationale for this site is betting on politics and at the moment there are very few opportunities. No US election, no by-elections, no leadership contests and GE2015 not for nearly two years.

    If it hadn't been for the fixed term parliament act we'd be talking about possible early elections.

    This site is at its worst when there's nothing to be bet on something that's going to be resolved within a short time.

    isam said:

    Wouldn't be surprised if Ladbrokes put up ricks like this just so Mike backs them and they get a load of inexpensive publicity. They only let him have £33 at 3s then cut it to 6/4!

    Portsmouth South ? Deputy Speakers Seat ?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "I think it started yesterday because I posted a response to a silly claim you made on Sunday night.

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion."


    Don't beat yourself up, Charles. From what I can gather, the "silly claim that you responded to" was something you had mistaken as a "joke".

    "You've yet to actually put up any evidence to support your claim."

    The life expectancy figures are a matter of record, Charles. You can huff and you can puff but they are there in black and white. This has happened on London's watch.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion.

    No it's not! And I'm right on that!
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    edited June 2013

    THe main rationale for this site is betting on politics and at the moment there are very few opportunities. No US election, no by-elections, no leadership contests and GE2015 not for nearly two years.

    If it hadn't been for the fixed term parliament act we'd be talking about possible early elections.

    This site is at its worst when there's nothing to be bet on something that's going to be resolved within a short time.

    isam said:

    Wouldn't be surprised if Ladbrokes put up ricks like this just so Mike backs them and they get a load of inexpensive publicity. They only let him have £33 at 3s then cut it to 6/4!

    I dont disagree. Whats that got to do with Ladbrokes putting up ricks, not laying a decent bet then getting a load of pubilcity?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758


    This site is at its worst when there's nothing to be bet on something that's going to be resolved within a short time.

    Whether @JamesKelly will ever recover from his severe bout of last-word-ism-plus-I-am-always-right-ism?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772
    What I find very strange is that there was little difference in Scottish life expectancy until the 1950s. Putting aside the unfortunate growth of the SNP from the early 1960s onwards it is very difficult to see how Westminster rule could therefore be a factor.

    Scotland certainly had its full share of heavy industry, mining and ship building with added asbestos but did it really have more than, say, Newcastle? Glasgow is a depressing place but it is still at least as nice as Liverpool.

    Scots drink a lot more than the UK average. Have we simply not shared the English obsession with house buying and spent too much on the drink?

    For a good chunk of my life there has been something of an obsession amongst Scots about not being better than you are, not forgetting where you come from, discouraging aspirational sorts in a way that 19th century Scots would have found bewildering as they helped to build an empire. The reasons behind this are complex but it clearly does not help.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Whether @JamesKelly will ever recover from his severe bout of last-word-ism-plus-I-am-always-right-ism?"

    Charles, as we've already seen on this thread you're capable of starting an argument about whether this is Tuesday or not.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731

    "I think it started yesterday because I posted a response to a silly claim you made on Sunday night.

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion."


    Don't beat yourself up, Charles. From what I can gather, the "silly claim that you responded to" was something you had mistaken as a "joke".

    "You've yet to actually put up any evidence to support your claim."

    The life expectancy figures are a matter of record, Charles. You can huff and you can puff but they are there in black and white. This has happened on London's watch.

    Isn't the truth of the matter that no one can be sure whether it would have been different if Scotland were independent, so its futile to keep arguing about it?

    It could be the case that life expectancy would have been worse if Scotland had not been part of the union. No one can know, so what is the point of this argument?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    "I think it started yesterday because I posted a response to a silly claim you made on Sunday night.

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion."


    Don't beat yourself up, Charles. From what I can gather, the "silly claim that you responded to" was something you had mistaken as a "joke".

    "You've yet to actually put up any evidence to support your claim."

    The life expectancy figures are a matter of record, Charles. You can huff and you can puff but they are there in black and white. This has happened on London's watch.

    Yes, it did (although I suspect - without checking - that life expectancy is longer today than when the Union occured, but you're not giving London any credit for that).

    Your claim was that this is *because of the Union*. Not because of policies implemented, not because of the decline of heavy industry, not because of anything else, but *because of the political system*.

    That's a big claim - that political systems directly affect outcomes - that it would be interesting to debate. But you don't. You just dismiss any of the reasonable (but possibly wrong) points made by other posters without making a counter-argument.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "What I find very strange is that there was little difference in Scottish life expectancy until the 1950s. Putting aside the unfortunate growth of the SNP from the early 1960s onwards it is very difficult to see how Westminster rule could therefore be a factor. "

    Given that it started at a time when Westminster was in sole control, it's almost impossible to see how that can NOT be a factor.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750


    This site is at its worst when there's nothing to be bet on something that's going to be resolved within a short time.

    isam said:

    Wouldn't be surprised if Ladbrokes put up ricks like this just so Mike backs them and they get a load of inexpensive publicity. They only let him have £33 at 3s then cut it to 6/4!

    Thought about doing the odd slot on sport when politics is slow, or not your thing?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    carl said:

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion.

    No it's not! And I'm right on that!

    Game Set and Match to Carl.

    New balls required for PB tories. ;)

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    "Whether @JamesKelly will ever recover from his severe bout of last-word-ism-plus-I-am-always-right-ism?"

    Charles, as we've already seen on this thread you're capable of starting an argument about whether this is Tuesday or not.

    Odd. It's Tuesday - you started the discussion on Sunday night.

    I make that day 3 - but not 3x 24 hours.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    The answer to your question is contained in the blogpost I have already linked tot.

    Which, for some bizarre reason - by some completely inexplicable oversight fails to mention the decline in relative life expectancy since devolution.

    You can't even win an argument with yourself!
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Your claim was that this is *because of the Union*. Not because of policies implemented"

    Charles, for your own sake, I strongly advise you to stop flogging this dead horse. Policies implemented are only implemented because of the union. We would not have had the Thatcher government, or the Cameron government, or the Heath government (or even the Macmillan government after 1959) without the union. That is a fact.

    I was going to start this post by accusing you of 'hair-splitting', but it's not even that - the distinction you're attempting to draw just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The fact that an intelligent man like you can't seem to see that is extraordinary.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    Charles said:

    "I think it started yesterday because I posted a response to a silly claim you made on Sunday night.

    Arguing about whether it is day 2 or day 3 is about as productive as the main discussion."


    Don't beat yourself up, Charles. From what I can gather, the "silly claim that you responded to" was something you had mistaken as a "joke".

    "You've yet to actually put up any evidence to support your claim."

    The life expectancy figures are a matter of record, Charles. You can huff and you can puff but they are there in black and white. This has happened on London's watch.



    That's a big claim - that political systems directly affect outcomes
    Big claim? Is it?

    Surely it's just a statement of the bleeding obvious?

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,688

    What is the explanation for why Scottish life expectancy declined relative to the rest of the United Kingdom starting in the 1950s (..)?

    Perhaps a generally less affluent population can afford the mod-cons that help longevity less. Two exponential curves will widen from one another.

    So for example if central heating (say) was adopted on average 1 year later in Scotland then you'd see an effect such as that. It would (of course) correct itself as the general adoption became more widespread. However if every year there's a new factor arriving then you'd see a growing divergence.

    Seemingly innocuous factors are far more likely to be driving such anomalies rather than anything politicians do (or may do).



  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited June 2013
    Interesting.. this could get quite political depending on what is uncovered.


    I was required to provide intelligence on those deemed “subversives”. The description at the time was anybody that was deemed to pose a threat to the state, possibly risking overthrowing it by non-democratic means. In practice that was a loose term, only made worse now with the terminology of “domestic extremists”.

    People who are now mainstream politicians were, at their start of their political careers, deemed to be subversive by the Special Branch - to name one: Jack Straw. I read Mr Straw’s rather large file. I would suggest he asks to see a copy. It will be a pink file with his individual ‘RF’ (Registry File) number. The same for Diane Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn - and Imran Khan, the lawyer for the Stephen Lawrence family. The human rights solicitor firm Bindmans also had its own dedicated file.

    (This is subject to the files not having been shredded since I left the Special Branch.)

    I had reservations in some areas even beginning with the use of a dead child’s identity as my own. But at the time I ignored that.

    The SDS remit at the time was to prevent public disorder - and officers at the time felt that was the justification for our undercover work.

    My very clear position now is that police should no longer be involved in any undercover work against political activists.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/25/stephen-lawrence-peter-francis-webchat
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    "What I find very strange is that there was little difference in Scottish life expectancy until the 1950s. Putting aside the unfortunate growth of the SNP from the early 1960s onwards it is very difficult to see how Westminster rule could therefore be a factor. "

    Given that it started at a time when Westminster was in sole control, it's almost impossible to see how that can NOT be a factor.

    But they had already been in sole control for 250 years.

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited June 2013
    Carlotta -

    "You can't even win an argument with yourself!"

    But luckily I've got you to argue with instead. You've ignored my question for a third time, ergo you don't have an answer.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    it's pointless though - the sun rising in the morning is the fault of the English.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited June 2013
    David -

    "But they had already been in sole control for 250 years."

    I think you may have just put your finger on why Scottish nationalism surged from the 1960s onwards. The union used to work for Scotland. It stopped working.
This discussion has been closed.