Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Given current polls the Tories shouldn’t be spooked by Corbyn

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited October 5 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Given current polls the Tories shouldn’t be spooked by Corbyn but they are

The Speccies Isabel Hardman has an excellent piece under the heading “Why the Tories feel so spooked by Jeremy Corbyn”. She argues that some of the messages from the LAB leader have the potential to resonate. She goes on:

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393
    First
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    Second! Like Corbyn & REmain....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,574
    Unilever has decided to stay in the UK after all...

    Seems they didn't want to give voters a chance to instruct them not to leave
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    Labour is also floundering in Scotland

    Strong contender for understatement of the week.....

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,544
    Charles said:

    Unilever has decided to stay in the UK after all...

    Seems they didn't want to give voters a chance to instruct them not to leave

    I've read a count done by one of our rivals that UK investors were ready to give the board an almighty slap in the face. It's time for Polman to step down considering this was all his idea and there is even some sense he's doing it to help his friend, the Dutch PM.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393
    See Tusk being a pratt again.

    Tweeting TM is 'emotional'

    No Tusk she is not. She is angry. Also would you have said that about a male leader. Sexist comments do not add to the debate

    Also trying to set ERG against her by saying Canada +++ has always been onthe table and omitting to say it requires an Irish sea border and treats a part of the UK separately from the whole

    I do not understand why those loyal to the EU do not critise his nonsense
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,371
    I don't think this is particularly about media coverage. It's more about the fact that at present Labour is not attempting to talk to the public. Instead, they're currently having an internal power struggle.

    At some point Labour will start talking to the public again. It remains to be seen whether that will be as popular as it was in the 2017 general election. The raw materials are certainly there should they choose to use them.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    In other news.....It Wasn't the Bus!

    http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/Cc9xDv5yxXagREbnVpvy/full

    ‘Why was it the UK that voted to leave, rather than any other member state?’. We show that the UK has long been one of the most Eurosceptic countries in the EU, which we argue can be partly explained by Britons’ comparatively weak sense of European identity. We also show that existing explanations of the UK’s vote to leave cannot account for Britons’ long-standing Euroscepticism: the UK scores lower than many other member states on measures of inequality/austerity, the ‘losers of globalisation’ and authoritarian values, and some of these measures are not even correlated with Euroscepticism across member states. In addition, we show that the positive association between national identity and Euroscepticism is stronger in the UK than in most other EU countries. Overall, we conclude that Britons’ weak sense of European identity was a key contributor to the Brexit vote.

    Oh, and it wasn't the press, either!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,574
    edited October 5
    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    Unilever has decided to stay in the UK after all...

    Seems they didn't want to give voters a chance to instruct them not to leave

    I've read a count done by one of our rivals that UK investors were ready to give the board an almighty slap in the face. It's time for Polman to step down considering this was all his idea and there is even some sense he's doing it to help his friend, the Dutch PM.
    They were going to be pasted. (Even my daughter was planning to vote against the move)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102
    edited October 5
    The polls at the last general election had the Tories on about 42% before the election was called and they got 42%.

    The main movement over the campaign was smaller parties to Labour protesting over austerity particularly and the Tories lost any gains made after the dementia tax while Remainers switched to Labour to try and stop a hard Brexit.

    This week May moved the Tories away from ever more austerity, she is moving towards agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period with the EU and the dementia tax has been dumped, firmly planting herself on the centre ground.

    Yes she has lost some voters to UKIP after Chequers but polling shows she has also picked up some Remainers who voted Labour or LD in 2017 and Labour has also lost some support to the LDs.

    Hence the Tories are at least level with Labour in the polls and if there were a general election tomorrow the Tories would almost certainly still be largest party
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,877
    Charles said:

    Unilever has decided to stay in the UK after all...

    Seems they didn't want to give voters a chance to instruct them not to leave

    Why have a vote you cannot win? Obviously exPM Cameron is not on Unilever's board :D
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393
    HYUFD said:

    The polls at the last general election had the Tories on about 42% before the election was called and they got 42%.

    The main movement over the campaign was smaller parties to Labour protesting over austerity particularly and the Tories lost any gains made after the dementia tax while Remainers switched to Labour to try and stop a hard Brexit.

    This week May moved the Tories away from ever more austerity, she is moving towards agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period with the EU and the dementia tax has been dumped, firmly planting herself on the centre ground.

    Yes she has lost some voters to UKIP after Chequers but polling shows she has also picked up some Remainers who voted Labour or LD in 2017 and Labour has also lost some support to the LDs.

    Hence the Tories are at least level with Labour in the polls and if there were a general election tomorrow the Tories would almost certainly still be largest party

    Fair assessment
  • kjhkjh Posts: 281

    See Tusk being a pratt again.

    Tweeting TM is 'emotional'

    No Tusk she is not. She is angry. Also would you have said that about a male leader. Sexist comments do not add to the debate

    Also trying to set ERG against her by saying Canada +++ has always been onthe table and omitting to say it requires an Irish sea border and treats a part of the UK separately from the whole

    I do not understand why those loyal to the EU do not critise his nonsense

    I haven't seen the tweet so I don't know if it is out of context, but just commenting upon what you have said:

    Anger is an emotion.

    Saying someone is either emotional or angry is not sexist.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,907
    Charles said:

    Unilever has decided to stay in the UK after all...

    Seems they didn't want to give voters a chance to instruct them not to leave

    Twas Job Curtis wot won it. Good to see a House man stepping up to the mark.
  • FPT:

    Lots of talk about May's deal - don't assume that the deal she presents to the Commons will be an actual deal agreed with the EU. For a year and a half the UK have asked the EU for the moon on a stick and been told no. She had our MPs debating the whys and wherefores of variants of a Chequers plan which was fundamentally flawed from the outset, so why assume that the "deal" she has us debate is actually viable?

    Brexit remains the only game in town. Its absolutely the case as described in the thread that "the reason Labour has decided to talk so much about the way capitalism has left certain voters behind is that recent polling carried out by the party found it had strong resonance with groups of voters who feel pessimistic about the future of the country…"

    How they vote will still depend on the outcome from Brexit, what happens, which parties and leaders are seen to have taken which position.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,877
    kjh said:

    See Tusk being a pratt again.

    Tweeting TM is 'emotional'

    No Tusk she is not. She is angry. Also would you have said that about a male leader. Sexist comments do not add to the debate

    Also trying to set ERG against her by saying Canada +++ has always been onthe table and omitting to say it requires an Irish sea border and treats a part of the UK separately from the whole

    I do not understand why those loyal to the EU do not critise his nonsense

    I haven't seen the tweet so I don't know if it is out of context, but just commenting upon what you have said:

    Anger is an emotion.

    Saying someone is either emotional or angry is not sexist.
    Big G - Where did Tusk tweet this? It does not seem to be on his twitter timeline.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,312
    Morning all :)

    Away from matters Brexit and some informed comment on a key aspect of May's speech:

    https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/opinion/2018/10/removing-housing-borrowing-cap-step-right-direction?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_term=

    It's also worth noting the CIPFA concern over Councils borrowing to fund commercial investment property portfolios. For those who jumped quickly after 2008, it was a sound move - rates were very low and the pool of investment property considerable and almost all other potential investors were out of the market so there were very good deals to be made and some strong rental yields to be obtained.

    Whether that's the case now (and some of the sums I have heard District and Borough Councils offering for retail centres are very worrying) is debatable.

    Back to borrowing for housing and of course this is a step forward but this is far from being the only obstacle preventing large scale house building.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 2,256

    In other news.....It Wasn't the Bus!

    http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/Cc9xDv5yxXagREbnVpvy/full

    ‘Why was it the UK that voted to leave, rather than any other member state?’. We show that the UK has long been one of the most Eurosceptic countries in the EU, which we argue can be partly explained by Britons’ comparatively weak sense of European identity. We also show that existing explanations of the UK’s vote to leave cannot account for Britons’ long-standing Euroscepticism: the UK scores lower than many other member states on measures of inequality/austerity, the ‘losers of globalisation’ and authoritarian values, and some of these measures are not even correlated with Euroscepticism across member states. In addition, we show that the positive association between national identity and Euroscepticism is stronger in the UK than in most other EU countries. Overall, we conclude that Britons’ weak sense of European identity was a key contributor to the Brexit vote.

    Oh, and it wasn't the press, either!

    I always think that sociologists should only be allowed to play with linear regression models under strict supervision and with a letter from their mum. I don't think there is any doubt that Britons overall identify with the European project a bit less than other Europeans. But there has to be one country that comes last on any measurement. But the practical question is whether this difference is significant when it comes to voting in a referendum. We've had two - one a comfortable win for staying in and the other a damn near run thing. Nobody knows how a third would go, but at the very least you'd have to say it is quite conceivable that it would be to return to the fold.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 1,038
    (FPT, and seems relevant (as another GE is discussed - on the "spooked" front, consider the circumstances of yet another GE)

    On Brexit, I reckon:

    Stage 1 - Try to get an agreed Deal through Parliament.
    I see the chance of this as slim, but not completely nonexistent. I can't, personally, see any specific Deal acceptable to a majority of the HoC. However, things I can't foresee have happened before, so I won't discount this; it just seems unlikely.

    Stage 2 - Government and Parliament have a choice: No Deal Brexit or punt the decision to the public again.
    If the public were to vote their preference, it's a way to cut the Gordian knot. There are two ways to this: another referendum, or another general election.

    2a - Another referendum. Involving a huge climb-down by the Government, but such things have happened. If this were to happen, it seems likely that the choice would be "Deal or Remain" (If Parliament were willing to have No Deal, they'd just run with No Deal and not bother with this step). It's not implausible that it be "Deal or No Deal". If it's Deal-or-Remain, I expect "Deal" to win.

    2b - Another General Election. Seems preferred by some, but either the Conservatives would run with Theresa May leading in another snap election campaign [Literally everyone winces] just after failing to get her Party to push her own Deal through [winces more] or have an incredibly quick leadership contest - and in a campaign where loads of things other than Brexit will get discussed and the winner will assume their position on all these things is endorsed. I see this as unlikely, and God only knows what the outcome would be. And if it doesn't result in Theresa May both remaining there and winning a strong majority, we don't get her Deal, anyway, and the clock's run out. A50 extensions are possible, but not if it's "back to square one, sorry, we seem to have wasted all that time," I think.

    2c - The Government decides they don't like any of those options and takes No Deal anyway. In this situation, I expect the PM to fall and the Conservatives to carry the can for any and all issues and problems relating to No Deal Brexit (up to and including random negative events that have nothing to do with Brexit but get blamed on them anyway).

    So - a Deal getting through would be - what? 5-20% possible? If not, then it's either a referendum, General Election, or No Deal. A referendum (10-25% possible) would probably result in a Deal (call it a 75% chance, to 25% Remain if those are the options, and 50-50 if it's Deal or No Deal, and call those 75-25 in respective probabilities). A GE (10-25% chance) would result in the Deal in a freak result (maybe 5%), A50 reset to start (maybe 10%), No Deal (85%). No Deal gives, well, No Deal at 100%.

    All of which doesn't calculate very well but gives indications. Looks like:
    No Deal ~70-90%
    Deal ~ 5-25%
    Remain ~ 2-4%
    A50 extension/go back to start ~1-2%
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647
    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,371

    In other news.....It Wasn't the Bus!

    http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/Cc9xDv5yxXagREbnVpvy/full

    ‘Why was it the UK that voted to leave, rather than any other member state?’. We show that the UK has long been one of the most Eurosceptic countries in the EU, which we argue can be partly explained by Britons’ comparatively weak sense of European identity. We also show that existing explanations of the UK’s vote to leave cannot account for Britons’ long-standing Euroscepticism: the UK scores lower than many other member states on measures of inequality/austerity, the ‘losers of globalisation’ and authoritarian values, and some of these measures are not even correlated with Euroscepticism across member states. In addition, we show that the positive association between national identity and Euroscepticism is stronger in the UK than in most other EU countries. Overall, we conclude that Britons’ weak sense of European identity was a key contributor to the Brexit vote.

    Oh, and it wasn't the press, either!

    No it wasn't the bus:

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2017/05/30/uk-voters-including-leavers-care-more-about-reducing-non-eu-than-eu-migration/

    "Despite Vote Leave’s insistence that Brexit was mainly about sovereignty and secondarily about concerns over the unfair access to Britain enjoyed by EU migrants, our results suggest otherwise. These are the post-hoc rationalisations of a rider whose anti-immigration elephant is firmly in control."
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,941

    In other news.....It Wasn't the Bus!

    http://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/Cc9xDv5yxXagREbnVpvy/full

    ‘Why was it the UK that voted to leave, rather than any other member state?’. We show that the UK has long been one of the most Eurosceptic countries in the EU, which we argue can be partly explained by Britons’ comparatively weak sense of European identity. We also show that existing explanations of the UK’s vote to leave cannot account for Britons’ long-standing Euroscepticism: the UK scores lower than many other member states on measures of inequality/austerity, the ‘losers of globalisation’ and authoritarian values, and some of these measures are not even correlated with Euroscepticism across member states. In addition, we show that the positive association between national identity and Euroscepticism is stronger in the UK than in most other EU countries. Overall, we conclude that Britons’ weak sense of European identity was a key contributor to the Brexit vote.

    Oh, and it wasn't the press, either!

    I always think that sociologists should only be allowed to play with linear regression models under strict supervision and with a letter from their mum. I don't think there is any doubt that Britons overall identify with the European project a bit less than other Europeans. But there has to be one country that comes last on any measurement. But the practical question is whether this difference is significant when it comes to voting in a referendum. We've had two - one a comfortable win for staying in and the other a damn near run thing. Nobody knows how a third would go, but at the very least you'd have to say it is quite conceivable that it would be to return to the fold.
    Two non comparable referenda. One about a long term fractious membership of an organisation in which we were 'the awkward squad' where we were on the second tier as we rejected the key planks of integration and currency and open borders.

    The other where the experience was short, largely positive and inclusive with a far higher percentage of common goals without consistent bickering and argument.

    Apart from that they were identical, with one person one vote.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102

    FPT:

    Lots of talk about May's deal - don't assume that the deal she presents to the Commons will be an actual deal agreed with the EU. For a year and a half the UK have asked the EU for the moon on a stick and been told no. She had our MPs debating the whys and wherefores of variants of a Chequers plan which was fundamentally flawed from the outset, so why assume that the "deal" she has us debate is actually viable?

    Brexit remains the only game in town. Its absolutely the case as described in the thread that "the reason Labour has decided to talk so much about the way capitalism has left certain voters behind is that recent polling carried out by the party found it had strong resonance with groups of voters who feel pessimistic about the future of the country…"

    How they vote will still depend on the outcome from Brexit, what happens, which parties and leaders are seen to have taken which position.

    The only vote before Brexit will be on the Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period, a vote on a final trade deal will be years away if it gets agreed
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,102

    HYUFD said:

    The polls at the last general election had the Tories on about 42% before the election was called and they got 42%.

    The main movement over the campaign was smaller parties to Labour protesting over austerity particularly and the Tories lost any gains made after the dementia tax while Remainers switched to Labour to try and stop a hard Brexit.

    This week May moved the Tories away from ever more austerity, she is moving towards agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period with the EU and the dementia tax has been dumped, firmly planting herself on the centre ground.

    Yes she has lost some voters to UKIP after Chequers but polling shows she has also picked up some Remainers who voted Labour or LD in 2017 and Labour has also lost some support to the LDs.

    Hence the Tories are at least level with Labour in the polls and if there were a general election tomorrow the Tories would almost certainly still be largest party

    Fair assessment
    Glad we agree this morning
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,463
    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647
    FPT

    Betting Post

    F1: surprised to see Bottas' odds so relatively long for pole. Backed him each way, third the odds top 2, at 5.5 (5.75 with boost). I don't expect him to get pole, again, but he's got a strong chance of being 2nd, I think:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/10/japan-pre-qualifying-2018.html

    Also, noticed just now (think it wasn't up before), Hamilton is 2.5 to top FP3. That may be worth a look, as he's been top by a mile in the previous two sessions.

    Sensible ideas.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,382
    I think even his idol Boris might have hesitated in (publicly) describing his colleagues as such.

  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    Kavanaugh is now as short as 1/7 to be confirmed, and 4/1 not to be.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,382
    Of course an alternative would be a union where the much larger member routinely overrules the smaller members..
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 831
    Whilst I don’t think we should be restricting needed immigration I am always sceptical about such calculations, insomuch as I don’t think the true costs of immigration are ever counted. For example congestion and additional public service provision required, and all those other things that are very difficult to calculate. It is easy looking at a spreadsheet and filtering the data at HMRC.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,298

    Whilst I don’t think we should be restricting needed immigration I am always sceptical about such calculations, insomuch as I don’t think the true costs of immigration are ever counted. For example congestion and additional public service provision required, and all those other things that are very difficult to calculate. It is easy looking at a spreadsheet and filtering the data at HMRC.
    Are 40+ years of pensions included in these calculations ?

    If not file in the bin.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    An absence of complacency is a refreshing change.

    FPT:

    F1: surprised to see Bottas' odds so relatively long for pole. Backed him each way, third the odds top 2, at 5.5 (5.75 with boost). I don't expect him to get pole, again, but he's got a strong chance of being 2nd, I think:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2018/10/japan-pre-qualifying-2018.html

    Also, noticed just now (think it wasn't up before), Hamilton is 2.5 to top FP3. That may be worth a look, as he's been top by a mile in the previous two sessions.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 15,029

    Of course an alternative would be a union where the much larger member routinely overrules the smaller members..
    Indeed this is what was designed as a feature not a bug.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,260
    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,298
    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 831

    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
    The big things for me have always been access to work in Europe compared to low skilled European immigration, and high skilled non Eu immigration.

    I have heard it said on here that we will be missing out on employment opportunities across the whole of the EU after Brexit. It would surprise me greatly if the number of Brits working in Europe was even 1/10th of Europeans working here. I think Brits retire to Europe, but don’t go and work there to learn the language in any great numbers, as the value of speaking any language other than English Is not great. Whereas it is much more valuable for Europenaa to learn English to a good standard, and it is worth them taking low skilled work to do so.

    By reacting to the demand for this low skilled work we are then restricting skilled migration from outside EU, by those who could contribute even more, and meet specific skills gap in our economy to make the whole economy function better.

    This is why the politics of numbers matters, and why we need leaders not those in thrall to focus groups. The 100k net immigration number is just as bonkers as Blair’s 50% higher education number.

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The polls at the last general election had the Tories on about 42% before the election was called and they got 42%.

    The main movement over the campaign was smaller parties to Labour protesting over austerity particularly and the Tories lost any gains made after the dementia tax while Remainers switched to Labour to try and stop a hard Brexit.

    This week May moved the Tories away from ever more austerity, she is moving towards agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period with the EU and the dementia tax has been dumped, firmly planting herself on the centre ground.

    Yes she has lost some voters to UKIP after Chequers but polling shows she has also picked up some Remainers who voted Labour or LD in 2017 and Labour has also lost some support to the LDs.

    Hence the Tories are at least level with Labour in the polls and if there were a general election tomorrow the Tories would almost certainly still be largest party

    Fair assessment
    Glad we agree this morning
    We agree on quite a few things
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,489
    Nigelb said:

    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.

    It seems to have emboldened Musk, who's been a bit of a [email protected] this morning:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45754299

    I note we have had 'Tusk being a pratt' and 'Musk being a [email protected]' on this thread ...
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    The trick with corporation tax cuts is to attract real jobs and not just brass plates where licence payments are funnelled for tax reasons.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,382
    Nigelb said:
    And his beloved Kim Jong-un. Poor old Moon probably won't be thought important enough to be considered.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,119
    edited October 5

    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
    The big things for me have always been access to work in Europe compared to low skilled European immigration, and high skilled non Eu immigration.

    I have heard it said on here that we will be missing out on employment opportunities across the whole of the EU after Brexit. It would surprise me greatly if the number of Brits working in Europe was even 1/10th of Europeans working here. I think Brits retire to Europe, but don’t go and work there to learn the language in any great numbers, as the value of speaking any language other than English Is not great. Whereas it is much more valuable for Europenaa to learn English to a good standard, and it is worth them taking low skilled work to do so.

    By reacting to the demand for this low skilled work we are then restricting skilled migration from outside EU, by those who could contribute even more, and meet specific skills gap in our economy to make the whole economy function better.

    This is why the politics of numbers matters, and why we need leaders not those in thrall to focus groups. The 100k net immigration number is just as bonkers as Blair’s 50% higher education number.

    From the ONS (April '18), there were just under 800k UK citizens in EU countries (not including RoI). Of those, 70% were in just three countries: Spain, France and Germany. Only about a fifth of UK emigrants chose the EU as their destination - as you might expect, we're naturally more attracted to the Anglosphere.

    One old shibboleth that we can put into perspective - of those 800k folk, only a quarter were retirees. That said, retirees do choose Spain, Portugal, Malta, Cyprus and (surprising me) Bulgaria.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,877

    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).

    No one dare admit they have servers with back-doors builtin via hardware. Would you share your credit/debit card details with such a company?

    And what is to stop a corrupt individual in China selling the back-door access to a bunch of financial hackers? One server in the right place could be worth a fortune.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,589
    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    So, Unilever staying BECAUSE of Brexit.

    Another win for that bus, eh?
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,710
    HYUFD said:

    The polls at the last general election had the Tories on about 42% before the election was called and they got 42%.

    The main movement over the campaign was smaller parties to Labour protesting over austerity particularly and the Tories lost any gains made after the dementia tax while Remainers switched to Labour to try and stop a hard Brexit.

    This week May moved the Tories away from ever more austerity, she is moving towards agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period with the EU and the dementia tax has been dumped, firmly planting herself on the centre ground.

    Yes she has lost some voters to UKIP after Chequers but polling shows she has also picked up some Remainers who voted Labour or LD in 2017 and Labour has also lost some support to the LDs.

    Hence the Tories are at least level with Labour in the polls and if there were a general election tomorrow the Tories would almost certainly still be largest party

    Up to a point, perhaps. But there is a bit of rewriting of history here. The Tory campaign kicked off by inviting people - though not in so many words - to give Mrs may dictatorial powers. So naturally everybody rallied round to prevent that particular calamity.

    It didn`t quite work, because the Tories were able to use taxpayers`money to bribe the DUP into supporting their wicked plots. And so we are as we now are - a total shambles, and sinking fast.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,225
    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,119
    Mortimer said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    So, Unilever staying BECAUSE of Brexit.

    Another win for that bus, eh?
    For my own sanity, can we just agree that Unilever considered a move because of more favourable tax breaks and better anti-takeover laws in the Netherlands (remember their bruising encounter with Kraft?). It's really Brexit-neutral, though it's a good example (for both sides) of the dangers on seizing on individual data points to claim Brexit is a disaster/triumph (delete as applicable).
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 831
    TGOHF said:

    Whilst I don’t think we should be restricting needed immigration I am always sceptical about such calculations, insomuch as I don’t think the true costs of immigration are ever counted. For example congestion and additional public service provision required, and all those other things that are very difficult to calculate. It is easy looking at a spreadsheet and filtering the data at HMRC.
    Are 40+ years of pensions included in these calculations ?

    If not file in the bin.
    Exactly. The most disruptive influence in my workplace has a habit of having numerous spreadsheets to back up his prejudices. We got rid of a very good contractor earlier this year as they honestly tendered for work, and now we have a contractor who can’t make the money required, so puts in for every last variation and extra, annoys all parties in the work, and probably ends up being more expensive in both cost and time than before.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,298

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    Bollocks.

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/284319/united-kingdom-hmrc-tax-receipts-corporation-tax/

  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,589
    John_M said:

    Mortimer said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    So, Unilever staying BECAUSE of Brexit.

    Another win for that bus, eh?
    For my own sanity, can we just agree that Unilever considered a move because of more favourable tax breaks and better anti-takeover laws in the Netherlands (remember their bruising encounter with Kraft?). It's really Brexit-neutral, though it's a good example (for both sides) of the dangers on seizing on individual data points to claim Brexit is a disaster/triumph (delete as applicable).
    Hehe, indeed.

    I was being slightly ironic, though of course that irony would doubtless have been lost on some of our regular Brexit doomsayers.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 25,562
    That’s not hard at all.

    The headline would have been Despite Brexit.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,589
    edited October 5

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    King Cole, that depends whether the tax take rises or not. Obviously the tax paid by an individual company would be less, but if profits increase and more firms locate here for tax purposes that could exceed the shortfall caused by a lower rate.

    I think that's where the left gets it wrong. They focus on tax paid by individuals and firms, and not on tax received by the state.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,260
    Surely remainers need to spend the day eating marmite sandwiches.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393

    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).

    No one dare admit they have servers with back-doors builtin via hardware. Would you share your credit/debit card details with such a company?

    And what is to stop a corrupt individual in China selling the back-door access to a bunch of financial hackers? One server in the right place could be worth a fortune.
    Good morning Beverley.

    I have been cutting my lawn and have just caught up with your comment re Tusk's tweet

    He tweeted about Canada +++ but he was critised for describing the PM response to Salzburg as emotional

    Helen Whately, conservative vice chair for women, stated ' this language just plays to outdated stereotypes about women'
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 18,298
    Mortimer said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
    Laffer deniers and data don't often mix well.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,807
    This is a known phenomenon. Equally, several papers note that per capita GDP has remained flat or very slightly higher as a result of immigration of this type. It is not right to note the one effect without accepting the other.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647

    Nigelb said:

    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.

    It seems to have emboldened Musk, who's been a bit of a [email protected] this morning:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45754299

    I note we have had 'Tusk being a pratt' and 'Musk being a [email protected]' on this thread ...
    Though Musk has actually done a few useful things...
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    I would politely disagree OKC. Low taxes increase tax take
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,574
    That's a feature, not a bug.

    The US is a federal system - the Senate is weighted to protect the interests of the smaller states.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 23,214

    Kavanaugh is now as short as 1/7 to be confirmed, and 4/1 not to be.

    He's a certainty to be confirmed IMO and always has been.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,895
    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
    Laffer deniers and data don't often mix well.
    You don't need to agree with every part of Laffer's hypothesis to think it might hold true for Corporation Tax. CT is not primarily a revenue generating tax; it is a compliance burden and a backstop to prevent companies from having too much latitude for clever tricks. It needs to be 10% to achieve that, though.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 30,975
    John_M said:

    Mortimer said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    So, Unilever staying BECAUSE of Brexit.

    Another win for that bus, eh?
    For my own sanity, can we just agree that Unilever considered a move because of more favourable tax breaks and better anti-takeover laws in the Netherlands (remember their bruising encounter with Kraft?). It's really Brexit-neutral, though it's a good example (for both sides) of the dangers on seizing on individual data points to claim Brexit is a disaster/triumph (delete as applicable).
    Yes, but Polman, a vociferous Remainer handled it badly. While the likely losses faced by funds by being forced to disinvest from a no-longer FTSE100 stock could have been compensated for - it wasn't - they were told to 'suck it up for the greater good'.

    Remainers cheerfully pounced on the intended move as a casualty of Brexit, it would be churlish to deny Leavers their fun, even if both are wrong.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 1,502

    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
    The big things for me have always been access to work in Europe compared to low skilled European immigration, and high skilled non Eu immigration.

    I have heard it said on here that we will be missing out on employment opportunities across the whole of the EU after Brexit. It would surprise me greatly if the number of Brits working in Europe was even 1/10th of Europeans working here. I think Brits retire to Europe, but don’t go and work there to learn the language in any great numbers, as the value of speaking any language other than English Is not great. Whereas it is much more valuable for Europenaa to learn English to a good standard, and it is worth them taking low skilled work to do so.

    By reacting to the demand for this low skilled work we are then restricting skilled migration from outside EU, by those who could contribute even more, and meet specific skills gap in our economy to make the whole economy function better.

    This is why the politics of numbers matters, and why we need leaders not those in thrall to focus groups. The 100k net immigration number is just as bonkers as Blair’s 50% higher education number.

    Agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. The Tories have not had a leader who actually led since Thatcher. She challenged their received wisdom and told them home truths about themselves that they did not like to hear. All her successors have merely pandered to their prejudices and followed the line of least resistance. Leadership it is not.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,574

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    Congratulations!

    I'm sure that you will win a prize for your statistical analysis demonstrating that we are on the optimum point of the Laffer Curve.

    Would you care to share your working with us mere mortals?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 45,496
    Mr. Flashman (deceased), not fond of the increasing usage of the term 'denier'. Used about those who deny the Holocaust, fair enough, that's established historical fact, but spreading it to subjective and less serious matters is not a good shift, I think.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 23,214
    "Unilever scraps plan to move HQ from London after huge investor backlash"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/10/05/unilever-scraps-plan-end-dual-structure-huge-investor-backlash/
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,225
    edited October 5
    Mortimer said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
    Often. Not in the declining economy we’ll (probably) have after leaving the EU.

    All purpose answer to the other PB-ers who disagree with me. Unless, of course we’re going to cut the things the State provides. Not just education and health either. There are big EU subsidies to (for example) Welsh and Cornish farmers and it assumed that London is going to replace them in some way.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,807

    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
    The big things for me have always been access to work in Europe compared to low skilled European immigration, and high skilled non Eu immigration.

    I have heard it said on here that we will be missing out on employment opportunities across the whole of the EU after Brexit. It would surprise me greatly if the number of Brits working in Europe was even 1/10th of Europeans working here. I think Brits retire to Europe, but don’t go and work there to learn the language in any great numbers, as the value of speaking any language other than English Is not great. Whereas it is much more valuable for Europenaa to learn English to a good standard, and it is worth them taking low skilled work to do so.

    By reacting to the demand for this low skilled work we are then restricting skilled migration from outside EU, by those who could contribute even more, and meet specific skills gap in our economy to make the whole economy function better.

    This is why the politics of numbers matters, and why we need leaders not those in thrall to focus groups. The 100k net immigration number is just as bonkers as Blair’s 50% higher education number.

    Agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. The Tories have not had a leader who actually led since Thatcher. She challenged their received wisdom and told them home truths about themselves that they did not like to hear. All her successors have merely pandered to their prejudices and followed the line of least resistance. Leadership it is not.
    We did have some hoodie hugging and glacier adoring in the meantime, tbf.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312

    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).

    No one dare admit they have servers with back-doors builtin via hardware. Would you share your credit/debit card details with such a company?

    And what is to stop a corrupt individual in China selling the back-door access to a bunch of financial hackers? One server in the right place could be worth a fortune.
    Well, there have long been reports of network kit with CIA-approved back doors, not to mention CCHQ exploits. Still, so long as we don't do anything stupid like have the Chinese government build our nuclear power stations...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,382
    Mortimer said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
    That 'often' is doing a good bit of heavy lifting.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,489
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.

    It seems to have emboldened Musk, who's been a bit of a [email protected] this morning:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45754299

    I note we have had 'Tusk being a pratt' and 'Musk being a [email protected]' on this thread ...
    Though Musk has actually done a few useful things...
    True, but he stands the risk of damaging those useful things, and of making it very hard for him to do more useful things in the future.

    I know some people like to think he has a brain the size of a planet, but this behaviour is insane. It is utterly self-defeating, both financially and in terms of his reputation and that of the companies that are so closely tied to him.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,634
    Charles said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    Congratulations!

    I'm sure that you will win a prize for your statistical analysis demonstrating that we are on the optimum point of the Laffer Curve.

    Would you care to share your working with us mere mortals?
    IFS reckons we are quite a way beyond that point. They think those corporation tax cuts cost the state 16.5bn a year.

    https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9207
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.

    It seems to have emboldened Musk, who's been a bit of a [email protected] this morning:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45754299

    I note we have had 'Tusk being a pratt' and 'Musk being a [email protected]' on this thread ...
    Though Musk has actually done a few useful things...
    True, but he stands the risk of damaging those useful things, and of making it very hard for him to do more useful things in the future.

    I know some people like to think he has a brain the size of a planet, but this behaviour is insane. It is utterly self-defeating, both financially and in terms of his reputation and that of the companies that are so closely tied to him.
    True.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,807
    Daniel Craig is (or has been told to play it) too serious with none of that self-referential mocking that both Connery and Moore were so good at.

    I think the next James Bond should be Omar Djalili.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 831

    Just look at the migration numbers from outside the EU.

    I think that the continual dishonesty from Cameron's government that they failed to reach the immigration target because of the EU (when you can see that they would have failed to reach the target with zero net migration from the EU) was one thing that led to Leave winning the referendum. I was always amazed that they were able to repeat that claim.

    It's also a small example of the culture of dishonesty that is already the norm in our politics that makes us vulnerable to a Trump-like figure willing to take lying to ever more brazen extremes.
    The big things for me have always been access to work in Europe compared to low skilled European immigration, and high skilled non Eu immigration.

    I have heard it said on here that we will be missing out on employment opportunities across the whole of the EU after Brexit. It would surprise me greatly if the number of Brits working in Europe was even 1/10th of Europeans working here. I think Brits retire to Europe, but don’t go and work there to learn the language in any great numbers, as the value of speaking any language other than English Is not great. Whereas it is much more valuable for Europenaa to learn English to a good standard, and it is worth them taking low skilled work to do so.

    By reacting to the demand for this low skilled work we are then restricting skilled migration from outside EU, by those who could contribute even more, and meet specific skills gap in our economy to make the whole economy function better.

    This is why the politics of numbers matters, and why we need leaders not those in thrall to focus groups. The 100k net immigration number is just as bonkers as Blair’s 50% higher education number.

    Agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. The Tories have not had a leader who actually led since Thatcher. She challenged their received wisdom and told them home truths about themselves that they did not like to hear. All her successors have merely pandered to their prejudices and followed the line of least resistance. Leadership it is not.
    Anecdote alert!!!!!! I was speaking to my wife about politics in general last night and I was surprised with her responses. She works in the public sector and I had thought that she might think Corbyn had some good ideas. Surprisingly her main response was that he is sexist who treats the women in his party very badly. I mentioned anti semitism / IRA but she kept on going in about his outdated misogynist attitudes. When we got onto May we agreed that she is very wishy washy and not a leader but to her that is good for a Tory.
  • TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    I would politely disagree OKC. Low taxes increase tax take
    The best way to look at Laffer is to look where his ideas have been put into policy most recently, namely the Brownback administration in Kansas. In fact he was Sam Brownback's key tax policy advisor.

    It didn't go well...

    https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article154962419.html

    “Most tax cuts don’t pay for themselves, so if you support tax cuts because they create economic growth…you need to make hard decisions about broadening the tax base or cutting spending,”
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 4,674

    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).

    No one dare admit they have servers with back-doors builtin via hardware. Would you share your credit/debit card details with such a company?

    And what is to stop a corrupt individual in China selling the back-door access to a bunch of financial hackers? One server in the right place could be worth a fortune.
    Good morning Beverley.

    I have been cutting my lawn and have just caught up with your comment re Tusk's tweet

    He tweeted about Canada +++ but he was critised for describing the PM response to Salzburg as emotional

    Helen Whately, conservative vice chair for women, stated ' this language just plays to outdated stereotypes about women'
    To be fair, usually May is strereotyped as a cold and emotionless Maybot. To attribute human emotions to her is perhaps a positive move!

    Hillary had the same problem in being described as robotic, which is also slightly misogynistic, as if serious women were robots, and real women are flighty emotional things.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,907
    TGOHF said:

    Mortimer said:

    TGOHF said:

    tlg86 said:

    LOL!

    The Dutch employers organisation VNO-NCW is blaming Brexit for Unilever’s decision:

    The website DutchNews.nl quotes the organisation:

    [We are sorry that] such an important decision has become swept up in the turbulent political developments in the UK.

    It is also an indication of what Brexit means, a hard fight for corporate locations.

    Wait until we cut corporation tax further and EU rates are harmonised internally at a higher rate..
    We can’t afford to cut corporation tax even further without raising personal taxation.
    All together now, cutting tax rates often increases tax takes...
    Laffer deniers and data don't often mix well.
    I believe Laffer has never been proved, it's a kinda nice idea which might be true. What is undoubtedly true though is that tax cuts feed the kleptocratic tendency of the kleptocratic. It can be the case that tax rates are cut, management decides to raise its own salaries at the expense of workers, and the tax take goes up, but the overall effect of the change is net bad for public finances because you are paying the poorly paid more in tax credits and stuff. And that's all before you get into bleeding heart social justice arguments.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 68,929
    edited October 5
    TOPPING said:

    Daniel Craig is (or has been told to play it) too serious with none of that self-referential mocking that both Connery and Moore were so good at.

    I think the next James Bond should be Omar Djalili.
    I'm on team Hiddleston, Craig's my favourite bond.


  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 17,393

    Nigelb said:

    An interesting stat - Tesla didn't just outsell the luxury car brands in the US last month, but also the Toyota Corolla:
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/03/tesla-model-3-4th-best-selling-car-in-usa/

    And it does not look good for the German manufacturers.

    It seems to have emboldened Musk, who's been a bit of a [email protected] this morning:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45754299

    I note we have had 'Tusk being a pratt' and 'Musk being a [email protected]' on this thread ...
    Pratt yes the other description was not me
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 7,647
    Charles said:

    That's a feature, not a bug.

    The US is a federal system - the Senate is weighted to protect the interests of the smaller states.
    But is was not designed to impose the political views of the minority on the majority, as now, for instance, via the Supreme Court.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,574

    Chinese Spy News (see previous thread) -- everyone denied the Bloomberg story but Supermicro shares dropped 40 per cent yesterday (at one point, 50 per cent).

    No one dare admit they have servers with back-doors builtin via hardware. Would you share your credit/debit card details with such a company?

    And what is to stop a corrupt individual in China selling the back-door access to a bunch of financial hackers? One server in the right place could be worth a fortune.
    Well, there have long been reports of network kit with CIA-approved back doors, not to mention CCHQ exploits. Still, so long as we don't do anything stupid like have the Chinese government build our nuclear power stations...
    LOL!

    Presumably you mean GCHQ not CCHQ...

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,807
    edited October 5

    TOPPING said:

    Daniel Craig is (or has been told to play it) too serious with none of that self-referential mocking that both Connery and Moore were so good at.

    I think the next James Bond should be Omar Djalili.
    I'm on team Hiddlestone, Craig's my favourite bond.
    Tom Hiddlestone would explode in a self-love supernova (ask @Andy_Cooke for the equations) if he were to be given the gig.

    Edit: I am a huge Tom Hardy fan, that said.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,935
    Charles said:

    That's a feature, not a bug.

    The US is a federal system - the Senate is weighted to protect the interests of the smaller states.
    Its weighted to protect the interests of slave owning States, and they've never revised that.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,877

    TOPPING said:

    twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1048147223572303872

    Daniel Craig is (or has been told to play it) too serious with none of that self-referential mocking that both Connery and Moore were so good at.

    I think the next James Bond should be Omar Djalili.
    I'm on team Hiddlestone, Craig's my favourite bond.

    twitter.com/YouGov/status/1048143463055802370
    twitter.com/YouGov/status/1048143465039745024
    I like Daniel Craig as Bond and I think Tom Hardy could do it well.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 15,029
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    That's a feature, not a bug.

    The US is a federal system - the Senate is weighted to protect the interests of the smaller states.
    But is was not designed to impose the political views of the minority on the majority, as now, for instance, via the Supreme Court.
    It was specifically designed that the Supreme Court appointments were more reflected by States than by Population. That's why power to approve appointments was given to the Senate not the House.

    America wasn't designed as a pure democracy.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 9,935
    I wonder if there is a single proponent of the Laffer curve who also believes we are on the left hand side of the curve for any tax rate.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 68,929
    edited October 5
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Daniel Craig is (or has been told to play it) too serious with none of that self-referential mocking that both Connery and Moore were so good at.

    I think the next James Bond should be Omar Djalili.
    I'm on team Hiddlestone, Craig's my favourite bond.
    Tom Hiddlestone would explode in a self-love supernova (ask @Andy_Cooke for the equations) if he were to be given the gig.

    Edit: I am a huge Tom Hardy fan, that said.
    Tom Hardy lacks the nuance to play James Bond.

    That said, he was probably the one decent thing in Venom, which was pretty bad, not quite Catwoman bad, but still pretty bad.

    Almost seemed like an edition of the Species franchise.
This discussion has been closed.