@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
T - “Today Mr Burnham told The Telegraph that he would welcome Mr Miliband intervening to warn Labour of becoming the party of protest, but that it would "be welcome if he did.”
Chump? – Why, what would Ed achieve by it - and who would bother listening to him anyway.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
The Labour party is unlikely to poll under 27/8% even under Corbyn - if it goes as low as 20% for a sustained period it's finished and a new progressive left version takes over.
In a general election, a Corbyn-led Labour could easily poll well under 27% and probably below 20%. That's not to say it would (or will) but that there's a reasonable chance.
Under Foot, Labour only polled 27% and that was without the SNP knocking off 3% off their GB share, and without the Greens or UKIP as significant forces. Against that, there was a much stronger centre force in the Alliance as against the Lib Dems (but then the Conservatives are currently aiming for the centre in a way that Thatcher's 1983 Conservatives weren't).
Alternatively, both Brown and Miliband scored within a point of 30% so to drop a three or four from there is no big deal, particularly when most of their support (as with other parties, though to a lesser extent) only turns out once every five years anyway).
The apocalyptic scenario for Labour is a party riven by internal division over the next five years but which proves incapable of removing Corbyn (or removes him only for the same electorate to put him back), where the economy doesn't suffer a serious setback and where the budget is back near balance come 2020 with the spending taps beginning to be turned back on, where a Farron-led Lib Dems is chipping away at Labour's right wing while the SNP and UKIP keep other elements of their one-time coalition tied down elsewhere.
I don't expect that to happen. Too many opportunities for 'events' to intervene (the EU referendum being one obvious known unknown), and there's a good chance the global economy will hit the buffers at some point in the next five years (China?). Furthermore, despite Labour's historic inability to mount successful coups, surely something would be done in such dire circumstances. For that matter, Corbyn may jump if it looked as if he was about to destroy his own party. As a potential leader, he's unusual in that he's not in it for himself.
But having said all that, we're in a period of exceptional change and Labour should be aware that they're betting the house on Red.
Not to forget the very basics like parents who read to their young children every day versus parents who use the TV as a babysitter..
I am the last one you have to tell about that! When I am not running my main business (which doesn't take very long most days), I spend quite a bit of my time trying to teach kids of poor (real poor, not relatively poor), uneducated, and frequently disinterested parents, who mostly have no words of English and very few of their own language, its what you might call slow progress. Many of them have no books at home except the bible, most of them have never held a pen before they come to school, and most of them don't get enough food or sleep. Its what you call a challenging environment
Mr. Indigo, As for the lack of books, never holding a pen, parents who aren't interested, poor nutrition and sleep deprivation you could be talking about an awful lot of places in the UK. As the reception teachers at our village school here in prosperous Hurstpierpoint will attest.
A mate of mine who has taught in a sink school on a large estate in Brighton for thirty years (there is a man who deserves an OBE at the very least) is firmly of the opinion that something ought to be put into the water to stop the locals breeding. Either that or the children should be removed at birth and brought up in a properly run orphanage.
Agreed, although your reception teacher actually has some books for the kids when they start school, and only teaches 20ish not 50ish like some places not to far from me, so she isn't doing too badly
Fair go, Mr. Indigo, but I was struck by the similarities in the obstacles to a decent education facing a child in the third world to those of prosperous Britain.
Burnham seems to be the only candidate really trying to beat Corbyn. The only one trying to reach out to the people tempted to support Corbyn and offer a moderate alternative, and thus seeking to forge a coalition that can take the majority needed to win.
The rest seem only interested in fighting for their share of the minority that oppose Corbyn. It's kind of ironic, considering they attack Corbyn for effectively doing the same thing at the general election.
The tactical argument is I guess that anyone on the left is going to vote Corbyn, so you may as well go for the anti-Corbyn vote rather than try to peel off a few Corbyn people. The counter-argument is that veteran members especially are wary of a big split, so although they generally prefer a left-wing approach, they're open to a leftish candidate who isn't quite so potentially divisive.
But it's increasingly unimportant now what anyone says, as the votes will be flying off in the next few days. I think that EdM is right to avoid pitching in.
I am instinctively against the state interfering with people's lives, but I've come to the conclusion that poor parenting in some families results in far more government intervention that could be avoided.
Simply having some school classes on good parenting options (needs to be phrased like that to avoid a backlash) seems a good idea, with the added benefit of making kids think carefully whether they want to get into it any time soon.
Bad behaviour from your opponents does not justify bad behaviour on your own part.
I'm not ignoring anyone's drivel. I am just arguing against it in a respectful manner.
Yep. I always read your comments with interest. I don't usually bother with flightpath's - the abuse:content ratio is too high to bother with, even when I agree with him.
Betting post: Chelsea for the Prem each-way @ 7/2 (1/3 odds, 2 places) looks pretty reasonable.
.. and lay the 2.08 top 2 finish on Betfair!
If you like, though you'd probably get matched at < 2.0. Similar to my Man City @ 4/1 e/w tip last year... (though that was when 1/4 1-2) - no issue getting these on, even I was allowed £100...
Sad to admit and prob quite unprofessional, but I don't have the patience for long term bets at shortish prices, esp if it means trapsing around shops... sounds a sensible enough bet though
Was allowed £100 e/w online even as a 0.01 (I think). I usually just stick these sorts of things on and forget about them.
Going to try and lay the e/w part off on Betfair or just let it run ?
Medical professional maybe, but lawyers, accountants etc are likely paying similar premiums. And making their own pension contributions etc.
There's a limited amount of sympathy for grumbling doctors from those of us paying the tax that pays their salaries, whilst working under the same conditions they seem to be moaning about. Don't complain too much.
Indeed so - and legal aid has been drastically cut so that lawyers paid from the public purse have seen a drop in income.
But - genuine question this - what kinds of health services do the Commonwealth countries you are referring to have? Are they the same as the NHS or do they have more private provision?
Sorry when I talk about very similar, I mean easy to transition into. As in same language, fairly similar culture (often overlooked) and demographics. Set up is less important to those looking to move for work.
However I believe them to be the same in both Aus/NZ/Canada with small amounts of copayment needed to be levied, like we have with prescription charges. I am not gonna act like the authority on how it works!
Medical professional maybe, but lawyers, accountants etc are likely paying similar premiums. And making their own pension contributions etc.
There's a limited amount of sympathy for grumbling doctors from those of us paying the tax that pays their salaries, whilst working under the same conditions they seem to be moaning about. Don't complain too much.
I agree there is very little sympathy but the pay has drastically dropped, and other systems are offering far more. You don't have to be an idiot to realise that highly skilled people are being outbidded for.
If you were in the position of limited family ties, young and mobile - would you stay in this country or emigrate to Australiasia. Nevermind the pay, the QoL, the weather, etc? Then through in a casual (conservative) estimation of a doubling of pay, for around 20% less hours, and those hours are a lot nicer with actual lunch. Suddenly you are fighting for reasons to stay.
I talk more about GP as that is where I am - look at the training figures. The North east has filled HALF of its training posts. Across the whole of the UK they have filled around 2/3 to 3/4 of training posts. Then if you add in there are a sizeable chuck like me hoping for something better, but increasingly feeling like we should do our time, get our qualifications and go to the better offer.
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
There is no way the influence of good parenting either could or should be cancelled out by the State.
There is, however, plenty the state could and should do to encourage good parenting and provide additional support for those children without good parents or supportive family.
Cue cries of "nanny state"...
(Don't want to go into it, but this is something I feel rather strongly about!)
I am instinctively against the state interfering with people's lives, but I've come to the conclusion that poor parenting in some families results in far more government intervention that could be avoided. I remember when my first child was due, I was feeling guilty about not doing as much reading on parenting as my wife was doing. Then I went to the hospital for one of the scans, and the couple before us were having an argument, where the father was arguing he deserved credit for purely driving her to the hospital. She looked about eight months pregnant at the time.
I doubt we'll agree on the role of the state but I think offering basic resources, support and advice could change a lot of lives. You can't force people to become good parents but it wouldn't take much to provide the necessary resources to encourage good habits or to provide additional opportunities for support to children in at-risk situations.
Of course, the very concept of the state providing parenting advice, no matter how proven or common-sense, would be anathema to some and would likely become a political battle.
That being said, I still believe just reading the words "uninvolved parents" and how it affects outcomes might give some parents a wake-up call.
Not to forget the very basics like parents who read to their young children every day versus parents who use the TV as a babysitter..
I am the last one you have to tell about that! When I am not running my main business (which doesn't take very long most days), I spend quite a bit of my time trying to teach kids of poor (real poor, not relatively poor), uneducated, and frequently disinterested parents, who mostly have no words of English and very few of their own language, its what you might call slow progress. Many of them have no books at home except the bible, most of them have never held a pen before they come to school, and most of them don't get enough food or sleep. Its what you call a challenging environment
Mr. Indigo, As for the lack of books, never holding a pen, parents who aren't interested, poor nutrition and sleep deprivation you could be talking about an awful lot of places in the UK. As the reception teachers at our village school here in prosperous Hurstpierpoint will attest.
A mate of mine who has taught in a sink school on a large estate in Brighton for thirty years (there is a man who deserves an OBE at the very least) is firmly of the opinion that something ought to be put into the water to stop the locals breeding. Either that or the children should be removed at birth and brought up in a properly run orphanage.
Agreed, although your reception teacher actually has some books for the kids when they start school, and only teaches 20ish not 50ish like some places not to far from me, so she isn't doing too badly
Fair go, Mr. Indigo, but I was struck by the similarities in the obstacles to a decent education facing a child in the third world to those of prosperous Britain.
I wasn't disagreeing at all, I think children often have the same obstacles at home, but in the UK even a sink school has a fair chance of improving things. Here getting a reasonable education is an expensive proposition even for a middle class family, and from the frustrations I have had trying to get my own kids educated to a standard I would find acceptable, even throwing money at it only gets you so far.
Betting post: Chelsea for the Prem each-way @ 7/2 (1/3 odds, 2 places) looks pretty reasonable.
.. and lay the 2.08 top 2 finish on Betfair!
If you like, though you'd probably get matched at < 2.0. Similar to my Man City @ 4/1 e/w tip last year... (though that was when 1/4 1-2) - no issue getting these on, even I was allowed £100...
Sad to admit and prob quite unprofessional, but I don't have the patience for long term bets at shortish prices, esp if it means trapsing around shops... sounds a sensible enough bet though
Was allowed £100 e/w online even as a 0.01 (I think). I usually just stick these sorts of things on and forget about them.
Going to try and lay the e/w part off on Betfair or just let it run ?
Let it run. I'd rather lay the win part off, actually.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
Something is very wrong in Sweden. A woman and her son were apparently beheaded in IKEA last week by "asylum seekers", one of them supposedly shouting Allahu Akhbar. There are gruesome photos online that provide strong corroborative evidence.
However it is difficult to get concrete proof as the Swedish media is refusing to report it in any sensible way. Odd. Distressing.
And now - right now - there are reports of a knifeman on the rampage in another Swedish town.
It's alright. The Islamist problem will disappear when they appreciate Sweden letting in thousands of Syrian migrants.
Mr T is right about something being very wrong. The violence is quite irrational of course which is why Lefty governments and apologists are wrong to appease it. The notion that left wing governments can be 'spared' is daft.
Kids Company recruited around 100 troubled teenagers for a controversial programme of analysis including brain scans attempting to prove that being mistreated as a child can turn people violent.
The tests, strongly supported by the bankrupt children’s charity’s founder Camila Batmanghelidjh, a passionate advocate of the theory, continued even after the results from an initial round of research proved negative, it has emerged. Experts at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London carried out an initial series of tests involving MRI scans on a small group of teenage boys almost a decade ago but said they found no evidence of a link between the between the brain and antisocial behaviour.
Despite this, dozens more teenage boys associated with Kids Company have taken part in scans and other tests through other institutions.
Kids Company has also spearheaded a major £1.6 million fundraising campaign for further research which it said “will demonstrate” that neglect and trauma can have a lasting effect on children’s brains and that its own work was transforming children’s lives. The charity constructed a hi-tech “virtual brain” online and invited donors to become a "neuron" by donating £5.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
The Labour party is unlikely to poll under 27/8% even under Corbyn - if it goes as low as 20% for a sustained period it's finished and a new progressive left version takes over.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Umm. Knocking something onto the floor in the first 60 secs, then rambling, making lots of football analogies, talking even more about How Labour He Is, Party Before Everything Else.
I lost count of the references to I Agree With Jeremy. He mentioned setting up a commission to look into social care and I can't remember anything else.
Came across as pretty genial, bit nervous - but otherwise an empty vessel that wants people to like him more than anything else.
The recruitment argument is the strongest one GP can deploy. Ultimtely, pay and conditions should be determined by supply and demand, and if we can not get enough demand for the level of medical care we want, we need to up the pay or conditions accordingly.
I do think we have a wider problem with emigration of skilled professionals beyond just doctors. Right now it is a trickle, but it could easily turn into a flood. I know so many people fed up with London who are thinking about emigration in the five to ten year time horizon. We are in the position of being an overcrowded, high housing cost, high tax, bad weather island. Australia and the US are spacious, low living cost, low tax, good weather places. We can't do much about the last issue, but the first three certainly need to be addressed.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
Betting post: Chelsea for the Prem each-way @ 7/2 (1/3 odds, 2 places) looks pretty reasonable.
.. and lay the 2.08 top 2 finish on Betfair!
If you like, though you'd probably get matched at < 2.0. Similar to my Man City @ 4/1 e/w tip last year... (though that was when 1/4 1-2) - no issue getting these on, even I was allowed £100...
Sad to admit and prob quite unprofessional, but I don't have the patience for long term bets at shortish prices, esp if it means trapsing around shops... sounds a sensible enough bet though
Was allowed £100 e/w online even as a 0.01 (I think). I usually just stick these sorts of things on and forget about them.
Going to try and lay the e/w part off on Betfair or just let it run ?
Let it run. I'd rather lay the win part off, actually.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
That will suit Farage almost as well. If the Labour voters sit on their hands in seats like Rother Valley it will fall in his lap quite nicely.
Let's see if he keeps that promise. If he does, things become even more interesting than anyone expected.
It's not a promise. He said (if quoted accurately) that he 'favours' it. One thing I do expect from a Corbyn-led party is more internal democracy, so while he might put that idea to the NEC and potentially to conference, he won't try to bludgeon it through in the way that Brown would, or simply announce it as a done deal and dare anyone to oppose, in the manner of early Blair.
However tempting it might be as a means to remove him down the line, I would expect wiser heads to prevail. Firstly, it'd mean one or two renewed mandates for Corbyn first and secondly, it'd be a bind for whoever followed him as it'd be hard to dump the procedure straight away.
In fact, in theory I think Labour does technically have annual leadership elections but the barrier to anyone other than the leader standing (33% of MPs, IIRC, nominating openly), is so high as to make it meaningless.
Umm. Knocking something onto the floor in the first 60 secs, then rambling, making lots of football analogies, talking even more about How Labour He Is, Party Before Everything Else.
I lost count of the references to I Agree With Jeremy. He mentioned setting up a commission to look into social care and I can't remember anything else.
Came across as pretty genial, bit nervous - but otherwise an empty vessel that wants people to like him more than anything else.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
Welcome to PB! Good to hear a view from the inside. In your opinion what are the simple changes that would make life easier for GPs without breaking the NHS budget?
I'm in Wales. I am desperate for a return of prescription charges. Apparently the maths works out with there being little gained charging those who administer it to the amount the country gains. However they fail to appreciate the entitlement that goes with this. You loose track of the appointments that are made for hayfever tabs, nasal decongestents and all manner of over the counter preperations. Then very few make an appointment to get them, but phone up requesting paracetamol... Now this may not seem like much, but there is a pharmacist per item dispensed on the NHS charge of a couple of quid or so. Now add that, the drug cost, the time and admin cost and it just gets silly, for a 20p item in the supermarket.
So bring back prescription charges BUT also a list of non prescribables that are so cheap over the counter it is so expensive for the NHS to cover.
Another issue is doctors notes. Lots of people make appointments to 'get another'. That isn't too bad. What is bad is those who are requested to make an appointment for a note saying they can go back to work. The new fit note allows those to go back without any doctor input. We have huge battles with this and with schools asking for notes that should be self certified. You get in the horrible situation of having a long fight when you are overrunning or rolling over and writing the note, but fueling future demand. On top of this related is the occupational health that people expect us to do along with fitness to X style forms. Diet commencement fitness forms. There is a stupidly long list. One GP had 150 firearm applications from a year ago dumped on him by a local police force who asked if any of them had any problems that should preclude them from owning a firearm - no payment for this.
A lot of people demand a specific treatment or payment, especially branded drugs.
The cost of compensation claims is going through the roof with frankly stupid expectations. This is where crown indemnity comes in, which could be bulk bought by the government for general practice at a much lower price than it is currently got for.
But essentially there is so much demand for services and especially non core services. People expect so much, we try to help and cover and often get complaints if we don't do rather outrageous things...
No idea how to fix a lot of it though... Co payment is too toxic to suggest really although it works very well for dentistry.
Umm. Knocking something onto the floor in the first 60 secs, then rambling, making lots of football analogies, talking even more about How Labour He Is, Party Before Everything Else.
I lost count of the references to I Agree With Jeremy. He mentioned setting up a commission to look into social care and I can't remember anything else.
Came across as pretty genial, bit nervous - but otherwise an empty vessel that wants people to like him more than anything else.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Seeing how those two were received may have had something to do with his decision.
Umm. Knocking something onto the floor in the first 60 secs, then rambling, making lots of football analogies, talking even more about How Labour He Is, Party Before Everything Else.
I lost count of the references to I Agree With Jeremy. He mentioned setting up a commission to look into social care and I can't remember anything else.
Came across as pretty genial, bit nervous - but otherwise an empty vessel that wants people to like him more than anything else.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
The Labour party is unlikely to poll under 27/8% even under Corbyn - if it goes as low as 20% for a sustained period it's finished and a new progressive left version takes over.
....
But having said all that, we're in a period of exceptional change and Labour should be aware that they're betting the house on Red.
But it is not 'Labour' that is betting the house on Red. It is a gang of far left entryists who are not interested in Labour. The old Labour have gone all in and looks like they have lost their pot. These entryists are the people that Kinnock spent 10 years fighting to throw out! This is why Corbyn can flirt with annual elections - he would convert the £3 entryist and trade union proxies into full members. Once leader he can always be nominated, whereas before he never had a chance. By definition his entryists will always vote for him.
LabourList suggests that "all-party balloting" would "be expensive ... potentially bankrupting the party", apparently having not heard of this thing called "The Internet" which would make such ballots both cheap and accessible.
Labour leadership ballot papers received this am.My votes have been cast and posted off
This answers my question.
If its like postal voting at the general and local elections then most people complete their ballot papers as soon as they arrive by post.
Which means that it is already too late to change most people's minds.
So will Burnham become Shadow Health SoS under Corbyn or perhaps Shadow Foreign Sec?
I'll let everyone here know when and if I receive my ballot paper.
As a last minute £3er with known Conservatives in my family (I'm not a member of any political party myself though) it will be a good indicator as to when the final ballots have gone out.
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Threatening to walk off makes you sound like the white collar equivalent of a Tube driver.
Perhaps amongst the many Syrians and Libyans heading north across the Med, there are some medical professionals willing and able to pick up the slack? Assuming the GMC lets them play ball of course.
This weekend it is finally dawning on people that it is actually going to happen. Jeremy Corbyn is going to become leader of the Labour party. And when they ponder the potential consequences, some Labour MPs believe that the very existence of their party is now at stake.
“I don’t think the voters are focusing on any of this yet," said one. “It’s the summer. We’ve just had an election so people have tuned back out of politics. They might see in their peripheral vision that Labour’s having a big row – but so what, they’ve seen all that before. But when they wake up and pick up their paper, and see 'Jeremy Corbyn is the new Labour leader'– and then they switch on their TV and see him actually standing opposite David Cameron at the dispatch box for the first time – no one knows how they’re going to react. They could say 'OK, that’s it. Were done with you lot.'”
Jeremy Corbyn is poised for victory. Across the Labour party the lights are going out. We may not see them lit again in our lifetime.
LabourList suggests that "all-party balloting" would "be expensive ... potentially bankrupting the party", apparently having not heard of this thing called "The Internet" which would make such ballots both cheap and accessible.
Problem is it leads members of the shadow cabinet spending their time pandering to the activists to keep their job.
Or shuts out people which are talented, but not overly popular.
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Fair enough, Doc. You state the problem very eloquently but what is the answer? Is it that we should triple GP's salaries?
Thank you. There is no easy solution. I do not think a tripling of salaries would actually help too much. It may help retention of young possible emigrates, but it would not prevent the burnout or workload issues that there are.
If the workload and working day was the same as it was 5-10 years ago, I don't think there would be this high level of angst or panic in the system. People would work more sessions and it would exponentially solve the problem quicker.
The issue is the tipping point has been passed. More and shrinking hours or leaving due to the work pressures leaving more on those that are left, and making it less attractive. It is a vicious circle.
Put it this way - a tripling of salary alone would not make me want to stay here over emigrate with the way the working day is at the moment. That statement alone should resonate how unworkable the current system is.
The point I was trying to make was that in long term/political betting every bet is a "trading bet" and so the word "trading" can be dropped, it is meaningless. Its just a way of trying to sound clever
It's not meaningless, it's a bet which you intend, at the time you place it, not to hold until settlement, i.e. where you expect to make your profit not because you think the odds are longer than the true probability justifies, but because you are anticipating a shift in sentiment.
A good example was a Sporting Index spread bet I placed in early 2011 on Labour to get a majority. I had no intention of holding the bet to maturity, I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in.
"I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in. "
..and if you didn't think that about every single long term bet, you shouldn't be having them in the first place. Who puts bets on thinking "I reckon this will go against me, I'll be in negative equity, but sod it?!"
I just backed Gomis at 40/1 ew Top Premiership goalscorer.. it goes without saying that I think at some point he will go below 40/1 giving me the opportunity to back someone else or lay him for a nice book.. otherwise I wouldn't have backed him, I'd have waited until he went 50/1
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
At heart EdM is probably a Corbynite.
His Dad certainly would be!
For many years Jeremy made a Sunday pilgrimage to Tony Benn's beautiful Holland Park home where he'd attend symposia organized by Ralph and Benn. In this idyllic setting Corbyn got his political education.
LabourList suggests that "all-party balloting" would "be expensive ... potentially bankrupting the party", apparently having not heard of this thing called "The Internet" which would make such ballots both cheap and accessible.
Problem is it leads members of the shadow cabinet spending their time pandering to the activists to keep their job.
Or shuts out people which are talented, but not overly popular.
I'm not suggesting they do it, although I think the idea of polling the membership on issues on a regular basis is potentially a good one, I'm just suggesting that cost isn't the primary concern.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
At heart EdM is probably a Corbynite.
In honour of his dad. Damien McBride said as much.
It's a mystery why the Scottish authorities haven't launched a public prosecution against the person allegedly responsible for the Glasgow bin lorry crash, especially given that he was apparently reporting dizzy spells as far back as 1976. The family of one of the victims is to launch a private prosecution.
The point I was trying to make was that in long term/political betting every bet is a "trading bet" and so the word "trading" can be dropped, it is meaningless. Its just a way of trying to sound clever
It's not meaningless, it's a bet which you intend, at the time you place it, not to hold until settlement, i.e. where you expect to make your profit not because you think the odds are longer than the true probability justifies, but because you are anticipating a shift in sentiment.
A good example was a Sporting Index spread bet I placed in early 2011 on Labour to get a majority. I had no intention of holding the bet to maturity, I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in.
"I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in. "
..and if you didn't think that about every single long term bet, you shouldn't be having them in the first place. Who puts bets on thinking "I reckon this will go against me, I'll be in negative equity, but sod it?!"
I just backed Gomis at 40/1 ew Top Premiership goalscorer.. it goes without saying that I think at some point he will go below 40/1 giving me the opportunity to back someone else or lay him for a nice book.. otherwise I wouldn't have backed him, I'd have waited until he went 50/1
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
Yes you are in a select band of people who won money backing the Lib Dems to do well!
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
At heart EdM is probably a Corbynite.
In honour of his dad. Damien McBride said as much.
And also he could well get back in the shadow cabinet.... Energy shadow min?
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Con: 38% Lab: 25% UKIP: 18% Lib Dem: 6%
There will be a tipping point at which a couple of % points difference between Lab and UKIP lead to dozens of seats going purple. 20% for UKIP is not completely out of the question, the big unknowns at this point being how the Conservatives (and Cameron) approach the EU referendum and who is their leader in 2020.
Speaking to shadow ministers over the weekend, it appears a majority are moving towards the Maquis model. “The key lesson we learnt in the 1980s is you never voluntarily concede ground to the Left,” one said to me. They also pointed out that there are number of practical and constitutional reasons why it was important not relinquish control of the shadow cabinet. Each shadow cabinet position comes with significant financial resources for research and media work. The shadow cabinet also has control over a number of positions on Labour’s ruling NEC. “We haven’t had to check all this stuff for decades," one shadow minister said, “but when you look at the small print of the party rule book the Shadow Cabinet actually has a lot of influence over the party machinery."
It would be ironic if Ed did day anything about electability, since he himself was such an electoral drag on the party. I felt pretty much the same thing about Gordon yesterday who was equally useless as leader. Pot calling kettle sprang to mind.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
At heart EdM is probably a Corbynite.
In honour of his dad. Damien McBride said as much.
Something is very wrong in Sweden. A woman and her son were apparently beheaded in IKEA last week by "asylum seekers", one of them supposedly shouting Allahu Akhbar. There are gruesome photos online that provide strong corroborative evidence.
However it is difficult to get concrete proof as the Swedish media is refusing to report it in any sensible way. Odd. Distressing.
And now - right now - there are reports of a knifeman on the rampage in another Swedish town.
The Swedish left and centre have learnt nothing and forgotten nothing when it comes to immigration.
The point I was trying to make was that in long term/political betting every bet is a "trading bet" and so the word "trading" can be dropped, it is meaningless. Its just a way of trying to sound clever
It's not meaningless, it's a bet which you intend, at the time you place it, not to hold until settlement, i.e. where you expect to make your profit not because you think the odds are longer than the true probability justifies, but because you are anticipating a shift in sentiment.
A good example was a Sporting Index spread bet I placed in early 2011 on Labour to get a majority. I had no intention of holding the bet to maturity, I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in.
"I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in. "
..and if you didn't think that about every single long term bet, you shouldn't be having them in the first place. Who puts bets on thinking "I reckon this will go against me, I'll be in negative equity, but sod it?!"
I just backed Gomis at 40/1 ew Top Premiership goalscorer.. it goes without saying that I think at some point he will go below 40/1 giving me the opportunity to back someone else or lay him for a nice book.. otherwise I wouldn't have backed him, I'd have waited until he went 50/1
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
Yes you are in a select band of people who won money backing the Lib Dems to do well!
I was betting on UKIP doing badly, not the LibDems doing well!
Innocent Abroad..In my rather short list of friends I know of several who became millionaires simply by working hard at what they proved to be good at..none of them inherited any money and all are working class..none of them are crooks and all live in the UK.
For sure you can bet a lot of it was made by the sweat and toil of others. Unless pure speculation it is normally made when you have others doing a lot of graft for you.
Approaching half the houses inside the M25 are worth over a million quid, the owners of those are millionaires, must be one or two who got there without exploiting the downtrodden masses.
I was not talking about people who were just lucky buying a property, it was in reply to Richard and his comments re working hard and making millions. However you are correct.
You're describing the sense of entitlement hypertrophy that is common now.
I've always thought that GPs deserve their money. Bothered continually by a bewildering range of hypochondriacs, whingers and genuine cases. And expected to be there at convenient times to diagnose/prescribe on demand whatever is either correct or wanted.
The population is aging fast so you need to be a gerontologist as well as a geriatrician and paediatrician.
Your only recompense is that you are trusted but that increases the responsibility.
It would be ironic if Ed did day anything about electability, since he himself was such an electoral drag on the party. I felt pretty much the same thing about Gordon yesterday who was equally useless as leader. Pot calling kettle sprang to mind.
@christopherhope: BREAKING: Ed Miliband will not intervene in the Labour leadership campaign, The Telegraph can disclose. More here: http://t.co/KwtBYI0jxd
What a chump
I disagree. EdM showing a decency that is alien to Blair and Brown.
Or he simply has the self-awareness and common sense to understand that intervening with his opinion is unlikely to change much - and certainly won't help in the event that Corbyn does win.
At heart EdM is probably a Corbynite.
In honour of his dad. Damien McBride said as much.
I bet Trotsky is with Corbyn. She must be ashamed of her flippertigibbet master. Give her a biscuit as consolation.
@DPJHodges: Burnham camp hit back at Cooper for not stepping down. "She knows she can't win. She's running for 2nd. Just wants to lead the resistance".
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Fair enough, Doc. You state the problem very eloquently but what is the answer? Is it that we should triple GP's salaries?
Thank you. There is no easy solution. I do not think a tripling of salaries would actually help too much. It may help retention of young possible emigrates, but it would not prevent the burnout or workload issues that there are.
If the workload and working day was the same as it was 5-10 years ago, I don't think there would be this high level of angst or panic in the system. People would work more sessions and it would exponentially solve the problem quicker.
The issue is the tipping point has been passed. More and shrinking hours or leaving due to the work pressures leaving more on those that are left, and making it less attractive. It is a vicious circle.
Put it this way - a tripling of salary alone would not make me want to stay here over emigrate with the way the working day is at the moment. That statement alone should resonate how unworkable the current system is.
Thank you for an honest answer.
It would seem from what you say that actually charging people a modest but reasonable fee (say £20) to see their GP and for visits to A & E, might make a huge difference. Put in appropriate safeguards and exemptions and it should work. There will be lots of screaming but we had that when prescription charges were introduced and at divers times since - anyone remember how the nation was going to go blind when opticians were allowed to charge? People are used to paying for an optician's time and for dentists' they will get used to paying for a physicians'.
And before anyone gets on their high horse, I am retired and have a chronic illness plus serious eyesight problems, which means I probably spend more time in doctor's waiting rooms than the vast majority. I am also reasonably comfortably off and I would no objection to coughing up a twenty quid each time I see my GP. Of course I might also start demanding he keeps the appointment times and can tell me more than I can find out from Google, but that is another issue.
The point I was trying to make was that in long term/political betting every bet is a "trading bet" and so the word "trading" can be dropped, it is meaningless. Its just a way of trying to sound clever
It's not meaningless, it's a bet which you intend, at the time you place it, not to hold until settlement, i.e. where you expect to make your profit not because you think the odds are longer than the true probability justifies, but because you are anticipating a shift in sentiment.
A good example was a Sporting Index spread bet I placed in early 2011 on Labour to get a majority. I had no intention of holding the bet to maturity, I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in.
"I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in. "
..and if you didn't think that about every single long term bet, you shouldn't be having them in the first place. Who puts bets on thinking "I reckon this will go against me, I'll be in negative equity, but sod it?!"
I just backed Gomis at 40/1 ew Top Premiership goalscorer.. it goes without saying that I think at some point he will go below 40/1 giving me the opportunity to back someone else or lay him for a nice book.. otherwise I wouldn't have backed him, I'd have waited until he went 50/1
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
Yes you are in a select band of people who won money backing the Lib Dems to do well!
I was betting on UKIP doing badly, not the LibDems doing well!
MG As far as I am aware most of my millionaire friends who started businesses paid the going rates ..but most or them were freelance professionals who just charged the rate for the job... quite a number of them are really left wing too..always paid their taxes..and never seemingly pissed on their employees ..who ,of course, are always free to move on... Keep looking at the world as a glass half empty.. suits you..
Richard, as ever the chip on your shoulder means you cannot have a discussion on anything , you are always looking for offence where there is none. I was not talking about your pals persay , more generic given I do not have a clue who they are. Very few become millionaires by being nice guys that is for sure.
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven..
The majority of bettors are long term losers
Indeed they are. But "trading bet" as a term has value.
In my world, for instance, I'd always differentiate between investment type because that helps me define how I want to think about it. So, I'd tend to segment into deep value (essentially a trading bet), GARP (a long-term hold), Widows & Orphan (for income) or a punt (which I write off day 1 and make out like a bandit if it comes good).
I don't see why it should be different in the world of professional betting
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Con: 38% Lab: 25% UKIP: 18% Lib Dem: 6%
There will be a tipping point at which a couple of % points difference between Lab and UKIP lead to dozens of seats going purple. 20% for UKIP is not completely out of the question, the big unknowns at this point being how the Conservatives (and Cameron) approach the EU referendum and who is their leader in 2020.
EC makes that: Cons:361; LAB:198: LD:8; UKIP:4; GN:1; SNP:58; PC:4
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
That will suit Farage almost as well. If the Labour voters sit on their hands in seats like Rother Valley it will fall in his lap quite nicely.
Is the UKIP share that big? I don't recall that it is, although they got quite a few second places in 2015, after only getting 1 MP out of 4m votes, UKIP could suffer from the 'wasted vote syndrome' that affects the Greens/other small parties, and used to affect the LDs.
@DPJHodges: Burnham camp hit back at Cooper for not stepping down. "She knows she can't win. She's running for 2nd. Just wants to lead the resistance".
Cooper hits back: He knows he can't win. He's running for 2nd. Just wants a high price for his principles.
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Con: 38% Lab: 25% UKIP: 18% Lib Dem: 6%
There will be a tipping point at which a couple of % points difference between Lab and UKIP lead to dozens of seats going purple. 20% for UKIP is not completely out of the question, the big unknowns at this point being how the Conservatives (and Cameron) approach the EU referendum and who is their leader in 2020.
EC makes that: Cons:361; LAB:198: LD:8; UKIP:4; GN:1; SNP:58; PC:4
EC uses uniform national swing. UKIP's uneven division between demographics means it would win a lot of seats before that point.
The point I was trying to make was that in long term/political betting every bet is a "trading bet" and so the word "trading" can be dropped, it is meaningless. Its just a way of trying to sound clever
It's not meaningless, it's a bet which you intend, at the time you place it, not to hold until settlement, i.e. where you expect to make your profit not because you think the odds are longer than the true probability justifies, but because you are anticipating a shift in sentiment.
A good example was a Sporting Index spread bet I placed in early 2011 on Labour to get a majority. I had no intention of holding the bet to maturity, I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in.
"I simply (and rightly) thought that at some time sentiment would shift towards Labour and I'd be able to cash in. "
..and if you didn't think that about every single long term bet, you shouldn't be having them in the first place. Who puts bets on thinking "I reckon this will go against me, I'll be in negative equity, but sod it?!"
I just backed Gomis at 40/1 ew Top Premiership goalscorer.. it goes without saying that I think at some point he will go below 40/1 giving me the opportunity to back someone else or lay him for a nice book.. otherwise I wouldn't have backed him, I'd have waited until he went 50/1
The difference is that (AIUI) you are a professional bettor. Hence you are looking to maximise return on capital: every bet, to you, is a trading bet.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
Yes you are in a select band of people who won money backing the Lib Dems to do well!
I was betting on UKIP doing badly, not the LibDems doing well!
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Con: 38% Lab: 25% UKIP: 18% Lib Dem: 6%
There will be a tipping point at which a couple of % points difference between Lab and UKIP lead to dozens of seats going purple. 20% for UKIP is not completely out of the question, the big unknowns at this point being how the Conservatives (and Cameron) approach the EU referendum and who is their leader in 2020.
Senior Labour source after Andy Burnham speech: "Omg - he is weaker and more desperate than even I thought he was."
He started off this contest arguing for Labour to embrace centrist reform and think out of the box. Now he is saying he would put Corbyn and his fellow travellers in the Shadow Cabinet. He is a follower, not a leader.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
That will suit Farage almost as well. If the Labour voters sit on their hands in seats like Rother Valley it will fall in his lap quite nicely.
Is the UKIP share that big? I don't recall that it is, although they got quite a few second places in 2015, after only getting 1 MP out of 4m votes, UKIP could suffer from the 'wasted vote syndrome' that affects the Greens/other small parties, and used to affect the LDs.
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Fair enough, Doc. You state the problem very eloquently but what is the answer? Is it that we should triple GP's salaries?
Exactly, hard to feel too bad about people working 9-5 Mon-Fri for 3-4 times the average wage..
I agree in principle... until they start walking in droves and we can't get a doctor when we need one. The "average wage" thing is a red herring, its a globally marketable skill, people will go where the package is best. Its like being an airline pilot, they get very well paid for essentially driving a bus, because if we paid them any less they would go and work in another country at no cost to themselves.
@DPJHodges: Burnham camp hit back at Cooper for not stepping down. "She knows she can't win. She's running for 2nd. Just wants to lead the resistance".
Cooper hits back: He knows he can't win. He's running for 2nd. Just wants a high price for his principles.
You can bet on leader at next election. I think it is with Ladbrokes. I'd go for Jarvis myself but don't like putting money in for such a long time.
In 2004, nearly 60% of 25- to 34-year-olds were owner-occupiers; now it’s only just over a third.
I do not know what the current figures are or what the real issue is but according to the ONS - who have a neat graph - the percentage of home ownership rose steadily between 1918 and 2001. It fell between 2001 and 2011 (ie Labour years). http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/a-century-of-home-ownership-and-renting-in-england-and-wales/short-story-on-housing.html I'm not sure if this means home ownership numbers fell, presumably it does. But equally the graph can give no special emphasis to 'thatcherism'. (PS - it looks to me like ownership numbers were static 2001 - 2011)
Its graph also shows how the rental sector has changed.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
That will suit Farage almost as well. If the Labour voters sit on their hands in seats like Rother Valley it will fall in his lap quite nicely.
Is the UKIP share that big? I don't recall that it is, although they got quite a few second places in 2015, after only getting 1 MP out of 4m votes, UKIP could suffer from the 'wasted vote syndrome' that affects the Greens/other small parties, and used to affect the LDs.
OK UKIP are second in some places, such as my constituency where they have under 8,500 votes. The winning Tory has over 30,500 votes.
Ms. Apocalypse, depends on the polls. But even if a lower chance, the prospect would be more horrendous.
Yeah, but if some people's doomsday predictions come true and Labour are polling 20% then tbh there is no prospect of PM Corbyn.
If Labour are polling 20% one imagines quite a few kipper seats north of the Watford Gap. People who don't like Corbyn aren't going to be defecting to the Green's after all.
I doubt it tbh. They'll simply not vote. The Kipper share may rise, but I think they'll still be on 1 MP come 2020. Although people who don't like Corbyn may still be socially liberal, and centre-left - but want a moderate alternative (like me).
That will suit Farage almost as well. If the Labour voters sit on their hands in seats like Rother Valley it will fall in his lap quite nicely.
Is the UKIP share that big? I don't recall that it is, although they got quite a few second places in 2015, after only getting 1 MP out of 4m votes, UKIP could suffer from the 'wasted vote syndrome' that affects the Greens/other small parties, and used to affect the LDs.
. and of course the closest in terms of votes they came to winning a seat was Thurrock.... and they came 3rd
It's a mystery why the Scottish authorities haven't launched a public prosecution against the person allegedly responsible for the Glasgow bin lorry crash, especially given that he was apparently reporting dizzy spells as far back as 1976. The family of one of the victims is to launch a private prosecution.
Apparently it would never work as he was unconcious and so cannot be guilty. More pertinent is why DVLC will not prosecute as he has lied 7 times on licence applications. Also the council being so incompetent at monitoring their employees. You just had to look at the man to know he was seriously unwell and should not have been driving a lorry.
@DPJHodges: Burnham camp hit back at Cooper for not stepping down. "She knows she can't win. She's running for 2nd. Just wants to lead the resistance".
Cooper hits back: He knows he can't win. He's running for 2nd. Just wants a high price for his principles.
You can bet on leader at next election. I think it is with Ladbrokes. I'd go for Jarvis myself but don't like putting money in for such a long time.
Senior Labour source after Andy Burnham speech: "Omg - he is weaker and more desperate than even I thought he was."
I know with Corbyn at the helm, it doesn't seem like it, but people will look back and thank god that Andy Burnham did not become Labour leader.
I agree. The man isn't even sturdy enough to be a decent weathervane. Cooper (for all her anodynity) is transparently the best candidate. I'm sadly now laying her to rescue a bit of profit from what was previously a glorious outcome.
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Fair enough, Doc. You state the problem very eloquently but what is the answer? Is it that we should triple GP's salaries?
Thank you. There is no easy solution. I do not think a tripling of salaries would actually help too much. It may help retention of young possible emigrates, but it would not prevent the burnout or workload issues that there are.
If the workload and working day was the same as it was 5-10 years ago, I don't think there would be this high level of angst or panic in the system. People would work more sessions and it would exponentially solve the problem quicker.
The issue is the tipping point has been passed. More and shrinking hours or leaving due to the work pressures leaving more on those that are left, and making it less attractive. It is a vicious circle.
Put it this way - a tripling of salary alone would not make me want to stay here over emigrate with the way the working day is at the moment. That statement alone should resonate how unworkable the current system is.
Thank you for an honest answer.
It would seem from what you say that actually charging people a modest but reasonable fee (say £20) to see their GP and for visits to A & E, might make a huge difference. Put in appropriate safeguards and exemptions and it should work. There will be lots of screaming but we had that when prescription charges were introduced and at divers times since - anyone remember how the nation was going to go blind when opticians were allowed to charge? People are used to paying for an optician's time and for dentists' they will get used to paying for a physicians'.
And before anyone gets on their high horse, I am retired and have a chronic illness plus serious eyesight problems, which means I probably spend more time in doctor's waiting rooms than the vast majority. I am also reasonably comfortably off and I would no objection to coughing up a twenty quid each time I see my GP. Of course I might also start demanding he keeps the appointment times and can tell me more than I can find out from Google, but that is another issue.
I suspect even a £10 fee would make a huge difference in people thinking twice about going to the doctor over things like colds. It would also hopefully change the mindset among NHS receptionists, who seem to think the patients are lucky recipients of healthcare provision, rather than being the ones paying their salaries. You could use some of the money to fund more NHS dentists.
MG No chip on my shoulder...I just think that it is possible to be a financial success in this country and make a success of life without doing down any others..Most lefties, yourself included seem to think that successful people must be some sort of crook..
Comments
Chump? – Why, what would Ed achieve by it - and who would bother listening to him anyway.
Breitbart is reporting it, but I can't find any mainstream media outlets mentioning it:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/12/first-it-was-gun-control-now-its-knife-control-ikea-stops-selling-knives-after-store-stabbing/
There can't really be a media coverup, can there? I find it too outrageous to believe.
EDIT: Yahoo is reporting it, so it definitely happened: http://news.yahoo.com/three-injured-knife-attack-ikea-store-sweden-report-123104838--finance.html
Under Foot, Labour only polled 27% and that was without the SNP knocking off 3% off their GB share, and without the Greens or UKIP as significant forces. Against that, there was a much stronger centre force in the Alliance as against the Lib Dems (but then the Conservatives are currently aiming for the centre in a way that Thatcher's 1983 Conservatives weren't).
Alternatively, both Brown and Miliband scored within a point of 30% so to drop a three or four from there is no big deal, particularly when most of their support (as with other parties, though to a lesser extent) only turns out once every five years anyway).
The apocalyptic scenario for Labour is a party riven by internal division over the next five years but which proves incapable of removing Corbyn (or removes him only for the same electorate to put him back), where the economy doesn't suffer a serious setback and where the budget is back near balance come 2020 with the spending taps beginning to be turned back on, where a Farron-led Lib Dems is chipping away at Labour's right wing while the SNP and UKIP keep other elements of their one-time coalition tied down elsewhere.
I don't expect that to happen. Too many opportunities for 'events' to intervene (the EU referendum being one obvious known unknown), and there's a good chance the global economy will hit the buffers at some point in the next five years (China?). Furthermore, despite Labour's historic inability to mount successful coups, surely something would be done in such dire circumstances. For that matter, Corbyn may jump if it looked as if he was about to destroy his own party. As a potential leader, he's unusual in that he's not in it for himself.
But having said all that, we're in a period of exceptional change and Labour should be aware that they're betting the house on Red.
But it's increasingly unimportant now what anyone says, as the votes will be flying off in the next few days. I think that EdM is right to avoid pitching in. Simply having some school classes on good parenting options (needs to be phrased like that to avoid a backlash) seems a good idea, with the added benefit of making kids think carefully whether they want to get into it any time soon. Yep. I always read your comments with interest. I don't usually bother with flightpath's - the abuse:content ratio is too high to bother with, even when I agree with him.
Medical professional maybe, but lawyers, accountants etc are likely paying similar premiums. And making their own pension contributions etc.
There's a limited amount of sympathy for grumbling doctors from those of us paying the tax that pays their salaries, whilst working under the same conditions they seem to be moaning about. Don't complain too much.
Indeed so - and legal aid has been drastically cut so that lawyers paid from the public purse have seen a drop in income.
But - genuine question this - what kinds of health services do the Commonwealth countries you are referring to have? Are they the same as the NHS or do they have more private provision?
Sorry when I talk about very similar, I mean easy to transition into. As in same language, fairly similar culture (often overlooked) and demographics. Set up is less important to those looking to move for work.
However I believe them to be the same in both Aus/NZ/Canada with small amounts of copayment needed to be levied, like we have with prescription charges. I am not gonna act like the authority on how it works!
Medical professional maybe, but lawyers, accountants etc are likely paying similar premiums. And making their own pension contributions etc.
There's a limited amount of sympathy for grumbling doctors from those of us paying the tax that pays their salaries, whilst working under the same conditions they seem to be moaning about. Don't complain too much.
I agree there is very little sympathy but the pay has drastically dropped, and other systems are offering far more. You don't have to be an idiot to realise that highly skilled people are being outbidded for.
If you were in the position of limited family ties, young and mobile - would you stay in this country or emigrate to Australiasia. Nevermind the pay, the QoL, the weather, etc? Then through in a casual (conservative) estimation of a doubling of pay, for around 20% less hours, and those hours are a lot nicer with actual lunch. Suddenly you are fighting for reasons to stay.
I talk more about GP as that is where I am - look at the training figures. The North east has filled HALF of its training posts. Across the whole of the UK they have filled around 2/3 to 3/4 of training posts. Then if you add in there are a sizeable chuck like me hoping for something better, but increasingly feeling like we should do our time, get our qualifications and go to the better offer.
Joe public might not like us grumbling, but they will like it even less when we have relocated.
Of course, the very concept of the state providing parenting advice, no matter how proven or common-sense, would be anathema to some and would likely become a political battle.
That being said, I still believe just reading the words "uninvolved parents" and how it affects outcomes might give some parents a wake-up call.
If its like postal voting at the general and local elections then most people complete their ballot papers as soon as they arrive by post.
Which means that it is already too late to change most people's minds.
So will Burnham become Shadow Health SoS under Corbyn or perhaps Shadow Foreign Sec?
The recruitment argument is the strongest one GP can deploy. Ultimtely, pay and conditions should be determined by supply and demand, and if we can not get enough demand for the level of medical care we want, we need to up the pay or conditions accordingly.
I do think we have a wider problem with emigration of skilled professionals beyond just doctors. Right now it is a trickle, but it could easily turn into a flood. I know so many people fed up with London who are thinking about emigration in the five to ten year time horizon. We are in the position of being an overcrowded, high housing cost, high tax, bad weather island. Australia and the US are spacious, low living cost, low tax, good weather places. We can't do much about the last issue, but the first three certainly need to be addressed.
Let's hope Chelsea can find a bit of form now....
However tempting it might be as a means to remove him down the line, I would expect wiser heads to prevail. Firstly, it'd mean one or two renewed mandates for Corbyn first and secondly, it'd be a bind for whoever followed him as it'd be hard to dump the procedure straight away.
In fact, in theory I think Labour does technically have annual leadership elections but the barrier to anyone other than the leader standing (33% of MPs, IIRC, nominating openly), is so high as to make it meaningless.
If not how long will you wait and see?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/199272
If there is a cover-up, it's the Swedish police and IKEA, not the media.
I will be voting Cooper, Burnham, Kendall.
For all the good it will do.
Welcome to PB! Good to hear a view from the inside. In your opinion what are the simple changes that would make life easier for GPs without breaking the NHS budget?
I'm in Wales. I am desperate for a return of prescription charges. Apparently the maths works out with there being little gained charging those who administer it to the amount the country gains. However they fail to appreciate the entitlement that goes with this. You loose track of the appointments that are made for hayfever tabs, nasal decongestents and all manner of over the counter preperations. Then very few make an appointment to get them, but phone up requesting paracetamol... Now this may not seem like much, but there is a pharmacist per item dispensed on the NHS charge of a couple of quid or so. Now add that, the drug cost, the time and admin cost and it just gets silly, for a 20p item in the supermarket.
So bring back prescription charges BUT also a list of non prescribables that are so cheap over the counter it is so expensive for the NHS to cover.
Another issue is doctors notes. Lots of people make appointments to 'get another'. That isn't too bad. What is bad is those who are requested to make an appointment for a note saying they can go back to work. The new fit note allows those to go back without any doctor input. We have huge battles with this and with schools asking for notes that should be self certified. You get in the horrible situation of having a long fight when you are overrunning or rolling over and writing the note, but fueling future demand.
On top of this related is the occupational health that people expect us to do along with fitness to X style forms. Diet commencement fitness forms. There is a stupidly long list. One GP had 150 firearm applications from a year ago dumped on him by a local police force who asked if any of them had any problems that should preclude them from owning a firearm - no payment for this.
A lot of people demand a specific treatment or payment, especially branded drugs.
The cost of compensation claims is going through the roof with frankly stupid expectations. This is where crown indemnity comes in, which could be bulk bought by the government for general practice at a much lower price than it is currently got for.
But essentially there is so much demand for services and especially non core services. People expect so much, we try to help and cover and often get complaints if we don't do rather outrageous things...
No idea how to fix a lot of it though... Co payment is too toxic to suggest really although it works very well for dentistry.
It's just so Eh? for someone who's meant to be a serious politician.
These entryists are the people that Kinnock spent 10 years fighting to throw out! This is why Corbyn can flirt with annual elections - he would convert the £3 entryist and trade union proxies into full members. Once leader he can always be nominated, whereas before he never had a chance. By definition his entryists will always vote for him.
As a last minute £3er with known Conservatives in my family (I'm not a member of any political party myself though) it will be a good indicator as to when the final ballots have gone out.
You are correct that the liberal, Europhile centre-left won't go UKIP, but there could certainly be an element of the working class that gets the message that Labour are even more the party of Muslims and benefits by Corbyn being leader. They will also continue to benefit from the Calais crisis and the EU referendum. If Corbyn gets it, I could see the next election being:
Con: 38%
Lab: 25%
UKIP: 18%
Lib Dem: 6%
Perhaps amongst the many Syrians and Libyans heading north across the Med, there are some medical professionals willing and able to pick up the slack? Assuming the GMC lets them play ball of course.
Available to £3ers ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11805916/Labour-MPs-are-now-preparing-to-go-underground-to-resist-the-Corbyn-regime.html
Or shuts out people which are talented, but not overly popular.
If the workload and working day was the same as it was 5-10 years ago, I don't think there would be this high level of angst or panic in the system. People would work more sessions and it would exponentially solve the problem quicker.
The issue is the tipping point has been passed. More and shrinking hours or leaving due to the work pressures leaving more on those that are left, and making it less attractive. It is a vicious circle.
Put it this way - a tripling of salary alone would not make me want to stay here over emigrate with the way the working day is at the moment. That statement alone should resonate how unworkable the current system is.
The majority of bettors (in numbers, at least), although probably not on here, are outcome driven rather than value driven.
There is a small group - including myself - who bet small stakes for fun & don't really care about the value. Thus, for instance, our bet on UKIP seats was because I thought you were wrong, and wanted to prove a point. I didn't really care about the financial return (or the loss).
We might see the true Ed Miliband now.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/16/matthew-taylor-we-must-face-difficult-truths-to-solve-housing-crisis
In 2004, nearly 60% of 25- to 34-year-olds were owner-occupiers; now it’s only just over a third.
You're describing the sense of entitlement hypertrophy that is common now.
I've always thought that GPs deserve their money. Bothered continually by a bewildering range of hypochondriacs, whingers and genuine cases. And expected to be there at convenient times to diagnose/prescribe on demand whatever is either correct or wanted.
The population is aging fast so you need to be a gerontologist as well as a geriatrician and paediatrician.
Your only recompense is that you are trusted but that increases the responsibility.
Best of luck.
Senior Labour source after Andy Burnham speech: "Omg - he is weaker and more desperate than even I thought he was."
It would seem from what you say that actually charging people a modest but reasonable fee (say £20) to see their GP and for visits to A & E, might make a huge difference. Put in appropriate safeguards and exemptions and it should work. There will be lots of screaming but we had that when prescription charges were introduced and at divers times since - anyone remember how the nation was going to go blind when opticians were allowed to charge? People are used to paying for an optician's time and for dentists' they will get used to paying for a physicians'.
And before anyone gets on their high horse, I am retired and have a chronic illness plus serious eyesight problems, which means I probably spend more time in doctor's waiting rooms than the vast majority. I am also reasonably comfortably off and I would no objection to coughing up a twenty quid each time I see my GP. Of course I might also start demanding he keeps the appointment times and can tell me more than I can find out from Google, but that is another issue.
In my world, for instance, I'd always differentiate between investment type because that helps me define how I want to think about it. So, I'd tend to segment into deep value (essentially a trading bet), GARP (a long-term hold), Widows & Orphan (for income) or a punt (which I write off day 1 and make out like a bandit if it comes good).
I don't see why it should be different in the world of professional betting
Desperate is a bit cruel, but fair assessment. The overwhelming message Vote For Me Because I Love You All.
I know that there's not many polls around at the moment, but aren't UKIP losing share in those that are.
Also losing in local by-elections, where LibDems recieving a small boost:
http://www.conservativehome.com/tag/by-election-results
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/5941/ukips-council-election-performance-2015
The further property ownership levels drop, the more likely the country is to shift to the Left.
https://www.politicshome.com/party-politics/articles/news/andy-burnham-speech-manchester
Assuming Kippers learn to target their resources more sharply - they've a good base to build from.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/a-century-of-home-ownership-and-renting-in-england-and-wales/short-story-on-housing.html
I'm not sure if this means home ownership numbers fell, presumably it does. But equally the graph can give no special emphasis to 'thatcherism'.
(PS - it looks to me like ownership numbers were static 2001 - 2011)
Its graph also shows how the rental sector has changed.
16/1 #tradingbet
Good dog, have a biccy...
Andy's supine posture is just so WTF - he's desperate to suck up to JC.