I noticed some in the last thread using the Laffer Curve as an excuse to support their preconceptions rather than as an argument.
The giveaway is when they seem unaware that the same Laffer Curve also says that raising taxes can increase revenue and lowering them can reduce revenue.
The key variable is where we are on the curve; those who try to cite it as an excuse for a tax cut automatically seem to assume that we are, no matter the conditions or the current tax level, always on the right hand side of the peak, with not even the slightest attempt to justify that position.
"It can increase revenue by reducing taxes" instantly mutates into "It will increase revenue by reducing taxes." It is just as fallacious as the opposite automatic assumption; that raising taxes automatically increases revenue. It's very rare for either type of advocate to try to make the case legitimately.
"The key variable is where we are on the curve..." Pretty well right, except there is no empirical evidence for the existence of such a thing. One might posit the existence of numerous curves, for every different economy at different points in time - but as a useful predictor of economic responses to policy, such a thing just does not exist.
Indeed. The two end points are fixed at 0 (outside of edge cases at 100% where the earner is constrained by authority or duty to work for free). We know that at all points other than the end points, the curve is above the line.
The shape of said curve could be a simple arc, or double peaked, or resemble the scribblings of a demented alcoholic. It could even bend back upon itself at places, for all we know. It may even be the case that going up and down don't come back to the same place, due to "stickiness."
Which means that relying on it as an argument-ending justification is usually fallacious, albeit pointing out cases where marginal rates are absurdly high or negligibly low can provide plausibility.
“Beyond that, the idea that there is any theoretical curve which is useful as a predictive toll is simply nonsense for the rhetorical use of right wing politicians.”
The equivalent for left wing politicans is claiming that any tax increase will automatically increase tax take without considering behavioural changes. They’re politicians, it’s what they do - partial truths are a stock in trade. Although outright lying now seems very popular.
The watchdog showed the changes in students awarded first-class degrees between 2010-11 and 2017-18, including:
Imperial College London from 31% to 46% University of Huddersfield: 15% to 40% University College London: 24% to 40% Durham University: 18% to 38% University of East Anglia: 14% to 39% University of Northumbria: 16% to 35% University of West London: 13% to 34% Staffordshire University: 14% to 34%
The watchdog showed the changes in students awarded first-class degrees between 2010-11 and 2017-18, including:
Imperial College London from 31% to 46% University of Huddersfield: 15% to 40% University College London: 24% to 40% Durham University: 18% to 38% University of East Anglia: 14% to 39% University of Northumbria: 16% to 35% University of West London: 13% to 34% Staffordshire University: 14% to 34%
So Jeremy Corbyn's CSE in metalwork from 1960 is now worth a Nobel Prize in physics. No wonder Theresa May lost her majority in 2017. Speaking of which, I gather some Oxbridge colleges hand out firsts like icing sugar at one of Michael Gove's parties.
Colleges don't award degrees, the university does.
Best not to interrupt them in mid-smear - they don't like it
I noticed some in the last thread using the Laffer Curve as an excuse to support their preconceptions rather than as an argument.
The giveaway is when they seem unaware that the same Laffer Curve also says that raising taxes can increase revenue and lowering them can reduce revenue.
The key variable is where we are on the curve; those who try to cite it as an excuse for a tax cut automatically seem to assume that we are, no matter the conditions or the current tax level, always on the right hand side of the peak, with not even the slightest attempt to justify that position.
"It can increase revenue by reducing taxes" instantly mutates into "It will increase revenue by reducing taxes." It is just as fallacious as the opposite automatic assumption; that raising taxes automatically increases revenue. It's very rare for either type of advocate to try to make the case legitimately.
Indeed. Also worth pointing out that the Laffer curve has no known formula - no one knows where the peak is.
One interesting question is what Labour would do if Boris were to ask for a GE at a time when the election campaigns (with parliament dissolved) would straddle October 31st.
analagously, at what point would calling a VONC be too late to stop us leaving on Oct 31?
It would have to be done in the mini-session after the summer and before conference. Even then, it would produce an election *on* Oct 31 (if the Thursday convention is adhered to), unless the 2-week period is itself cut short by a Dissolution motion.
The normal process from VoNC to polling day takes a little over 7 weeks, at the minimum.
One interesting question is what Labour would do if Boris were to ask for a GE at a time when the election campaigns (with parliament dissolved) would straddle October 31st.
analagously, at what point would calling a VONC be too late to stop us leaving on Oct 31?
It would have to be done in the mini-session after the summer and before conference. Even then, it would produce an election *on* Oct 31 (if the Thursday convention is adhered to), unless the 2-week period is itself cut short by a Dissolution motion.
The normal process from VoNC to polling day takes a little over 7 weeks, at the minimum.
Exquisite. So Grieve et al would have to take a view on BoJo's actions well before he had taken or not taken them. For ever more he will then plead that he was/wasn't about to do whatever it was plus the VONC-ers would have a hell of a task to convince waverers that BoJo was indeed definitely going to do/not do it.
Will Labour NC a Boris-led govt intent on a No Deal Brexit?
Let's assume they do. The next questions are: - will the Commons back Corbyn to be PM? - will the Commons back anyone else to be PM?
If not, then we head to a GE anyway (and quite possibly No Deal into the bargain).
If they will back Corbyn in principle, the question becomes what conditions the SNP, Lib Dems and others would place on that Labour government. Probably, these would involve rapid action to at the least kick the can on Brexit but that done, the incentive for the LDs and SNP to continue to back a Labour party committed to its own Brexit deal (whether achievable or not), drops of markedly, so we either have an early dissolution built into the deal or else Corbyn gets No Confidenced in turn.
Whichever way the marble rolls, I think we end up at 'General Election' sooner or later, and by next Spring by the latest.
Pretty clear what the true Brexiteer agenda is now. As they all start calling for an ambassador who is pro-business and wants to get a quick and dirty trade deal done with Trump.
Get us out of Europe, away from that world of social safety net support, regulated markets and environmental protection, and into the US orbit, as a virtual off-shore state.
They will not rest until social and health protections are torn up, the jobs market completely deregulated, the welfare state reduced to american levels and everything privatised.
Damn, he's on to us
Sarcasm aside, that is a fair description of one subset of Leavers. In fairness, there are other subsets.
No, Corbyn will lead Labour into the next general election, even if he leads Labour to Foot 1983 levels of MPs and loses seats to a Boris led Tory Party and the LDs as Comres predicts Corbynism now so dominates the party and membership from the NEC down it is hard to see it being replaced. While Unite writes the checks and McCluskey still backs him. Indeed the next centre left PM may come from the LDs not Labour, Umunna or even Swinson look more credible future PMs than Corbyn
Checks???
Are you even British?
Born and raised, though with some French Huguenot ancestry a few centuries back
Are you and Charles distant cousins?
I doubt it, the highest my family goes is landed gentry, Charles seems to be minor aristocracy
Where did it all go wrong for you?
You can only become upper class by birth or arguably marriage, you can become upper middle class or rich by profession or career but not upper class
I noticed some in the last thread using the Laffer Curve as an excuse to support their preconceptions rather than as an argument.
The giveaway is when they seem unaware that the same Laffer Curve also says that raising taxes can increase revenue and lowering them can reduce revenue.
The key variable is where we are on the curve; those who try to cite it as an excuse for a tax cut automatically seem to assume that we are, no matter the conditions or the current tax level, always on the right hand side of the peak, with not even the slightest attempt to justify that position.
"It can increase revenue by reducing taxes" instantly mutates into "It will increase revenue by reducing taxes." It is just as fallacious as the opposite automatic assumption; that raising taxes automatically increases revenue. It's very rare for either type of advocate to try to make the case legitimately.
"The key variable is where we are on the curve..." Pretty well right, except there is no empirical evidence for the existence of such a thing. One might posit the existence of numerous curves, for every different economy at different points in time - but as a useful predictor of economic responses to policy, such a thing just does not exist.
Indeed. The two end points are fixed at 0 (outside of edge cases at 100% where the earner is constrained by authority or duty to work for free). We know that at all points other than the end points, the curve is above the line.
The shape of said curve could be a simple arc, or double peaked, or resemble the scribblings of a demented alcoholic. It could even bend back upon itself at places, for all we know. It may even be the case that going up and down don't come back to the same place, due to "stickiness."
Which means that relying on it as an argument-ending justification is usually fallacious, albeit pointing out cases where marginal rates are absurdly high or negligibly low can provide plausibility.
Another excellent post and made me laugh and perfect last para.
I'm hopeful my uncle is able to watch this, he hasn't got long now and cricket was one of the great loves of his life. Lots of ex Warwickshire players from the 90s era know him well so a win for England at Edgbaston against the Aussies would be splendid today ^_^;;
No, Corbyn will lead Labour into the next general election, even if he leads Labour to Foot 1983 levels of MPs and loses seats to a Boris led Tory Party and the LDs as Comres predicts Corbynism now so dominates the party and membership from the NEC down it is hard to see it being replaced. While Unite writes the checks and McCluskey still backs him. Indeed the next centre left PM may come from the LDs not Labour, Umunna or even Swinson look more credible future PMs than Corbyn
Checks???
Are you even British?
Born and raised, though with some French Huguenot ancestry a few centuries back
Are you and Charles distant cousins?
I doubt it, the highest my family goes is landed gentry, Charles seems to be minor aristocracy
Where did it all go wrong for you?
You can only become upper class by birth or arguably marriage, you can become upper middle class or rich by profession or career but not upper class
Trump's morning tweets today are particularly unhinged even by his standards. If he was a relative you would be about to stage an intervention.
It is odd, its as if he's not playing the part of petulant child, he actually really is one. There's no grace or dignity to what he does. I'm not a Trump hater, I fully support he's right to be there, and he's not responsible for many of the things laid at his door, and deranged frothing responses to him, he's fu*ing hard to stand up for sometimes.
I'm hopeful my uncle is able to watch this, he hasn't got long now and cricket was one of the great loves of his life. Lots of ex Warwickshire players from the 90s era know him well so a win for England at Edgbaston against the Aussies would be splendid today ^_^;;
We're England fans, we've been raised on failure, it is our default position to be pessimistic.
Pretty clear what the true Brexiteer agenda is now. As they all start calling for an ambassador who is pro-business and wants to get a quick and dirty trade deal done with Trump.
Get us out of Europe, away from that world of social safety net support, regulated markets and environmental protection, and into the US orbit, as a virtual off-shore state.
They will not rest until social and health protections are torn up, the jobs market completely deregulated, the welfare state reduced to american levels and everything privatised.
That's what it has always been, along with overcoming any concerted attempts to fight tax avoidance. But the rise of the far right and the Bannon-Dugin nexus has complicated things, and made their game even more, yes, treacherous.
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Indeed. Also worth pointing out that the Laffer curve has no known formula - no one knows where the peak is.
Furthermore, even if one could calculate the exact 'sweet spot' for a tax - i.e the rate at which total revenue from it would be maximized - one would not necessarily want to set it there.
Examples -
Raising so much tax that we get public affluence, private squalor.
Tax on vices - if they raise a lot they are failing. Ideally they should raise zero.
“Beyond that, the idea that there is any theoretical curve which is useful as a predictive toll is simply nonsense for the rhetorical use of right wing politicians.”
The equivalent for left wing politicans is claiming that any tax increase will automatically increase tax take without considering behavioural changes. They’re politicians, it’s what they do - partial truths are a stock in trade. Although outright lying now seems very popular.
It tends to be true that the 'optimal' rate in terms of maximising revenue is well above what might be an optimal rate for the longer term health of the economy (amongst other things).
Which is another reason "the Laffer Curve" is such a crap basis for arguing for lower tax rates.
Con down 24 points. Lab down 1 point. From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Con down 24 points. Lab down 1 point. From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Labour down 15% on 2017 v Boris with Comres, Tories only down 10%
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
Surely the sensible way to explore polls is to look at trends. The past week or so has seen steady progress for the Tories with Labour easing back. Until this trend changes I'd say some form of Brexit could well win the day. But simply projecting one poll into a 'result' is pointless
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
With May or Hunt it would likely be the Tories largest party but LDs holding the balance of power and going to Labour this time rather than the Tories in return for EUref2 and maybe also demanding Corbyn's head as they demanded Brown's head in 2010 too as the price of their support.
Clearly only Boris can win a majority for the Tories and for Brexit as Comres shows
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Combined Nats on 56 rather than 39 certainly looks more realistic.
Con down 24 points. Lab down 1 point. From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Labour down 15% on 2017 v Boris with Comres, Tories only down 10%
That wasn't the comparator originally being made. Do you carry oil on you for the bearings on the goalposts to make them easier to wheel around?
Con down 24 points. Lab down 1 point. From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Labour down 15% on 2017 v Boris with Comres, Tories only down 10%
That wasn't the comparator originally being made. Do you carry oil on you for the bearings on the goalposts to make them easier to wheel around?
None of these comparisons really help - given the febrile state we in which we now find ourselves. The normal rules of engagement have long since been thrown out of the window.
Con down 24 points. Lab down 1 point. From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Labour down 15% on 2017 v Boris with Comres, Tories only down 10%
That wasn't the comparator originally being made. Do you carry oil on you for the bearings on the goalposts to make them easier to wheel around?
They do fold up ones nowadays...very handy for shifting them....even the badgers could probably move them.
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Combined Nats on 56 rather than 39 certainly looks more realistic.
Tbf I did shade the SNP percentage up just a little to 3.25%, reflecting their currently strong performance in Scottish polls. So that can’t be read directly from the UK wide figures in the BMG.
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Combined Nats on 56 rather than 39 certainly looks more realistic.
Tbf I did shade the SNP percentage up just a little to 3.25%, reflecting their currently strong performance in Scottish polls. So that can’t be read directly from the UK wide figures in the BMG.
Fair enough. Also worth adding, if there is a LD/Green alliance, then PC are at present part of it. Which may be worth a few more in Wales.
Trump's morning tweets today are particularly unhinged even by his standards. If he was a relative you would be about to stage an intervention.
It is odd, its as if he's not playing the part of petulant child, he actually really is one. There's no grace or dignity to what he does. I'm not a Trump hater, I fully support he's right to be there, and he's not responsible for many of the things laid at his door, and deranged frothing responses to him, he's fu*ing hard to stand up for sometimes.
Pretty clear what the true Brexiteer agenda is now. As they all start calling for an ambassador who is pro-business and wants to get a quick and dirty trade deal done with Trump.
Get us out of Europe, away from that world of social safety net support, regulated markets and environmental protection, and into the US orbit, as a virtual off-shore state.
They will not rest until social and health protections are torn up, the jobs market completely deregulated, the welfare state reduced to american levels and everything privatised.
That's what it has always been, along with overcoming any concerted attempts to fight tax avoidance. But the rise of the far right and the Bannon-Dugin nexus has complicated things, and made their game even more, yes, treacherous.
But try explaining that to those who barley watch a news report and get everything from the daily mail. They look at you as if you are demented. They don’t understand tax havens or have a clue about Deregulation.
Instead of cherry picking individual polls, (that also include hypothetical PMs) can we have an aggregate with a weighting, kinda like how 538 do their polls?
If you'd told me during series 3 of the apprentice that US President Trump would be retweeting (was that a thing in 2007?) Katie Hopkins in 2019, I would not have believed you.
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Combined Nats on 56 rather than 39 certainly looks more realistic.
Tbf I did shade the SNP percentage up just a little to 3.25%, reflecting their currently strong performance in Scottish polls. So that can’t be read directly from the UK wide figures in the BMG.
The SNP are not on much more than the 38% they got in 2017 in current polls, still well below the 50% they got in 2015
The outriders for Magic Grandpa contain some really nasty individuals...
Pure Leninism or Stalinism basically. If you are ill, vulnerable, poor etc etc they will stand up for you, but the moment you question the right of the Party to have complete control of your life and the state, you are dead.
Labour antisemitism: 30 whistleblowers to give evidence to EHRC
More than 30 whistleblowers including current Labour members of staff will submit evidence to the equalities watchdog about antisemitism in the party, the Guardian understands.
There is nothing we (as members here) can do to get rid of him.
The Dems aren't pushing for impeachment - as it suits them to have him there to rail against.
So if those in the US who could act to remove him aren't doing so, what choice is there but to accept the situation for what it is and cope with it?
I'm not suggesting we can get rid of him. That is for the American public to do next year.
However, I see value in consistently slagging him off as opposed to a shrug and a 'c'est la vie' - because that is to normalize things which should not be normalized.
The outriders for Magic Grandpa contain some really nasty individuals...
Pure Leninism or Stalinism basically. If you are ill, vulnerable, poor etc etc they will stand up for you, but the moment you question the right of the Party to have complete control of your life and the state, you are dead.
Imagine if they ever get the levers of power....rather than just a tw@tter account.
There is nothing we (as members here) can do to get rid of him.
The Dems aren't pushing for impeachment - as it suits them to have him there to rail against.
So if those in the US who could act to remove him aren't doing so, what choice is there but to accept the situation for what it is and cope with it?
I'm not suggesting we can get rid of him. That is for the American public to do next year.
However, I see value in consistently slagging him off as opposed to a shrug and a 'c'est la vie' - because that is to normalize things which should not be normalized.
I don't see the point in wasting energy on constantly attacking someone or something that won't see your attacks and would ignore them if they did.
Better to focus on what you can change - at least that is how I view things.
It is why I saw no point in the protests outside Blenheim when Trump visited - he was never going to pay attention. It might make the protesters feel better inside but it won't change a thing.
Everyone has the right to protest, rant, rail against whatever they like (within the law) but that isn't my way of operating.
It might be a bit of a bubble but the US stock market has done very well under Trump.
There is quite a lot of evidence that he regards the stock market as some sort of manifestation of USA plc. If the Stock Market is doing well so is the US. If not policy changes are needed.
Big two parties back to 55% . Brexit party barely higher than UKIP in 2015.
Flavible - who I think are reasoning along the right lines, although I can’t vouch for their model, suggests Con 269, Lab 248, LD57 for the same poll result. With the Nationalists on 56, one Green, one BXP. Looks like the end of Brexit to me.
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Combined Nats on 56 rather than 39 certainly looks more realistic.
Tbf I did shade the SNP percentage up just a little to 3.25%, reflecting their currently strong performance in Scottish polls. So that can’t be read directly from the UK wide figures in the BMG.
The SNP are not on much more than the 38% they got in 2017 in current polls, still well below the 50% they got in 2015
3.25% ex NI is about 40% in Scotland, so close enough
In all the hubbub about the Panorama programme about anti-Semitism and Labour's response, no one seems to have realised that the allegations made in the programme are of direct bearing to the EHRC investigation into the Labour party. That was always going to be difficult for Labour and it now looks set to become devastating for the party leadership's vestigial credibility.
Meanwhile, those Labour MPs purportedly opposed to the party's tolerance of anti-Semitism are continuing to do nothing meaningful.
It's amazing the difference in how the anti semitism stuff runs and runs and sticks to Corbyn like glue yet the much bigger problem with the Tories and muslims gets barely a mention in compariosn. I would say its odd but it isn't. We really are colour blind as a nation when it comes to racism and prejudice. The Tories hating on predominantly Brown people is clearly an acceptable prejudice when neither should be.
In all the hubbub about the Panorama programme about anti-Semitism and Labour's response, no one seems to have realised that the allegations made in the programme are of direct bearing to the EHRC investigation into the Labour party. That was always going to be difficult for Labour and it now looks set to become devastating for the party leadership's vestigial credibility.
Meanwhile, those Labour MPs purportedly opposed to the party's tolerance of anti-Semitism are continuing to do nothing meaningful.
What can they usefully do, at the moment? If there is a need to strike, surely it will be after the EHRC reports, rather than a TV program?
In all the hubbub about the Panorama programme about anti-Semitism and Labour's response, no one seems to have realised that the allegations made in the programme are of direct bearing to the EHRC investigation into the Labour party. That was always going to be difficult for Labour and it now looks set to become devastating for the party leadership's vestigial credibility.
Meanwhile, those Labour MPs purportedly opposed to the party's tolerance of anti-Semitism are continuing to do nothing meaningful.
Its labour's response to it that has caused much more damage and Corbyn using a Spanish speaking decoy as he left his home was bizarre
In all the hubbub about the Panorama programme about anti-Semitism and Labour's response, no one seems to have realised that the allegations made in the programme are of direct bearing to the EHRC investigation into the Labour party. That was always going to be difficult for Labour and it now looks set to become devastating for the party leadership's vestigial credibility.
Meanwhile, those Labour MPs purportedly opposed to the party's tolerance of anti-Semitism are continuing to do nothing meaningful.
Haven't the cult already decided the EHRC are run by the Zionists?
One interesting question is what Labour would do if Boris were to ask for a GE at a time when the election campaigns (with parliament dissolved) would straddle October 31st.
analagously, at what point would calling a VONC be too late to stop us leaving on Oct 31?
It would have to be done in the mini-session after the summer and before conference. Even then, it would produce an election *on* Oct 31 (if the Thursday convention is adhered to), unless the 2-week period is itself cut short by a Dissolution motion.
The normal process from VoNC to polling day takes a little over 7 weeks, at the minimum.
Exquisite. So Grieve et al would have to take a view on BoJo's actions well before he had taken or not taken them. For ever more he will then plead that he was/wasn't about to do whatever it was plus the VONC-ers would have a hell of a task to convince waverers that BoJo was indeed definitely going to do/not do it.
Edit: = it's a mess!
Not necessarily. Grieve doesn't want a GE. An election only gets triggered if there's no new govt that can be formed. I think that if a VoNC does carry in the autumn, those MPs voting for it know that they're effectively going to have to put Corbyn into No 10, for a while at least.
Who he will be aware is a notorious far right activist who promotes extreme racist views.
This, my fellow posters, is the President of the USA.
WTF.
If the USA (indeed the world) survives this, they will need to spend a lot of time fixing a constitution that has allowed someone who is dangerously ill and/or unhinged to become president.
The 25th is supposed to be the way to deal with this, but it clearly doesn't work if the Cabinet are all place men and the rest of the governing party doesn't care.
Comments
The two end points are fixed at 0 (outside of edge cases at 100% where the earner is constrained by authority or duty to work for free). We know that at all points other than the end points, the curve is above the line.
The shape of said curve could be a simple arc, or double peaked, or resemble the scribblings of a demented alcoholic. It could even bend back upon itself at places, for all we know. It may even be the case that going up and down don't come back to the same place, due to "stickiness."
Which means that relying on it as an argument-ending justification is usually fallacious, albeit pointing out cases where marginal rates are absurdly high or negligibly low can provide plausibility.
“Beyond that, the idea that there is any theoretical curve which is useful as a predictive toll is simply nonsense for the rhetorical use of right wing politicians.”
The equivalent for left wing politicans is claiming that any tax increase will automatically increase tax take without considering behavioural changes. They’re politicians, it’s what they do - partial truths are a stock in trade. Although outright lying now seems very popular.
(Average of ComRes/YouGov/Opinium - most recent 2019 vs first 3 after GE announcement 2017)
Con 24 (-24)
Lab 24 (-1)
BxP 21 (new)
LD 17 (+6)
Grn 7 (+4)
UKIP 1 (-7)
The normal process from VoNC to polling day takes a little over 7 weeks, at the minimum.
I'm sticking to my morning prediction, we'll win the semi and then lose to the Black Caps in the final
Edit: = it's a mess!
With Boris as Tory leader the Tories take a clear lead with Comres
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1148312432768684032?s=20
I'm hopeful my uncle is able to watch this, he hasn't got long now and cricket was one of the great loves of his life. Lots of ex Warwickshire players from the 90s era know him well so a win for England at Edgbaston against the Aussies would be splendid today ^_^;;
At around 4/1.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=28&LAB=27&LIB=18&Brexit=14&Green=6&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
I shall believe the chairman is a non-person the instant he has been removed from official party photographic records.
https://twitter.com/NeworpK/status/1149209516472512513
If you assume a Green/LibDem alliance, and allocate two thirds of the Green vote to the LibDems, the alliance gets 81, with the Tories 253 and Labour 244
Examples -
Raising so much tax that we get public affluence, private squalor.
Tax on vices - if they raise a lot they are failing. Ideally they should raise zero.
Which is another reason "the Laffer Curve" is such a crap basis for arguing for lower tax rates.
Lab down 1 point.
From a position where the Tories ended up seriously bricking it on the night and losing their majority to become all-but-impotent.
And your takeaway point is Labour being down one point...
Clearly only Boris can win a majority for the Tories and for Brexit as Comres shows
Do you carry oil on you for the bearings on the goalposts to make them easier to wheel around?
Barcelona have signed England Under-16 striker Louie Barry on a three-year contract from West Bromwich Albion.
I cannot for the life of me understand why so many are so sanguine about this individual being the President of the USA.
And as for those who support him? - especially here in the UK - well there is something sorely lacking there.
God help us all.
https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1149017641211826188
The Dems aren't pushing for impeachment - as it suits them to have him there to rail against.
So if those in the US who could act to remove him aren't doing so, what choice is there but to accept the situation for what it is and cope with it?
https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/1149302800133828611
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1149279676587630593?s=20
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1149279678143836160?s=20
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1149279679045672961?s=20
Sounds a fair description of the White House every day.
More than 30 whistleblowers including current Labour members of staff will submit evidence to the equalities watchdog about antisemitism in the party, the Guardian understands.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jul/11/labour-antisemitism-30-whistleblowers-to-give-evidence-to-ehrc
However, I see value in consistently slagging him off as opposed to a shrug and a 'c'est la vie' - because that is to normalize things which should not be normalized.
Better to focus on what you can change - at least that is how I view things.
It is why I saw no point in the protests outside Blenheim when Trump visited - he was never going to pay attention. It might make the protesters feel better inside but it won't change a thing.
Everyone has the right to protest, rant, rail against whatever they like (within the law) but that isn't my way of operating.
An Boris wants to kiss his arse.
This, my fellow posters, is the President of the USA.
WTF.
"Alexander does not steal victory."
"We shall find a way, or make one."
"I came, I saw, I conquered."
Meanwhile, those Labour MPs purportedly opposed to the party's tolerance of anti-Semitism are continuing to do nothing meaningful.
The 25th is supposed to be the way to deal with this, but it clearly doesn't work if the Cabinet are all place men and the rest of the governing party doesn't care.