Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Buckingham constituency where there must be a high chance

13

Comments

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,543
    FF43 said:

    geoffw said:

    There is nothing to stop our own standards and regulations matching those of the EU. That eliminates non-tariff barriers as an impediment to trade with the EU 27. Indeed we start off from that very position.

    Membership of the Single Market? Because unless we formally commit to alignment and the EU formally accepts that commitment, "matching to standards" doesn't mean a thing. The NTBs stay.
    This gets to the key of the negotiations. The number 1 priority of the EU is to keep us aligned. They want that agreement.

  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,793
    Looking at demographics and political history/vote share of the Lib Dems historically, I've got to say Buckingham looks a lot more like Witney than Richmond Park.

    My "Bayesian prior" would be to assume they'd end up 45-55% Con, 25-35% Lib Dem, Labour 10-20% and see what specific information would cause me to adjust that expectation.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092

    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    geoffw said:


    Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.

    Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
    I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
    Sure abolition of all tariffs.
    But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
    Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
    +1
    There's more than a hint of mercantalism in the phrase "unfair advantage".
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    Rexel56 said:

    Rexel56 said:

    O/T sitting outside our barn in the Yorkshire Dales enjoying the sunshine... a massive fight going on above for ownership of a house martin nest... one pair will get into the nest then the other pair tag-team to drag them out by the throat... quite vicious... unfortunately the pairs are indistinguishable so difficult to see which is winning

    House martins here seem to have deserted us. There was a house a bit further down the street which had had nests for around 20 years. New owners decorated over the autumn and removed the nests and I don’t think any pairs have tried this year. May need to wait for the paint to get a bit older.
    On a positive note we saw swifts over the garden during the weekend.
    I think they may have relocated here... six nests last year, though many chicks died during a cold wet early summer... the nestsmore than filling up this year, with overbooking by the look of it! they mark the wall where they nest with droppings in order to find the spot next summer... if the marks have been painted over they would struggle... its illegal to interfere with an active nest so important to knock them down over winter as your neighbour did... a right mess if they nest over the doorways so we hang mesh guards on the eaves at the vital spots...
    I think this year the general breeding season may be late, due to the cold wet April. And it’s still cold here in the wind.
    Nothing in our blue-tit orientated box this year. It’s got a CCTV camera fitting and currently it’s even more boring than early Saturday evening TV.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,881
    edited May 2018

    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    geoffw said:


    Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.

    Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
    I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
    Sure abolition of all tariffs.
    But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
    Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
    I think Ha-Joon Chang demolished this in Kicking away the Ladder.
    In any case - the relevance of the Victorian era to the modern economy is dubious.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    How do you think the Corbynistas would react if I told them

    1) A former MP for Buckingham was a Mossad spy

    2) A billionaire

    3) Stole the pensions of lots of hard working working class people

    4) Jewish

    5) Died in mysterious circumstances and was buried in Jerusalem

    If Harold Wilson's Labour can win Buckingham then so should Jeremy Corbyn's Labour party.

    That was when Milton Keynes was in the constituency. It isn't currently.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223

    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    geoffw said:


    Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.

    Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
    I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
    Sure abolition of all tariffs.
    But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
    Not necessarily. Read the history of the Victorian era. Britain started scrapping mercantilist tariffs in the 1820s, and by the 1850s had scrapped all tariffs. Unilaterally. This was followed by 40 years of the fastest growth this country has ever seen. And the growth was not from the Empire. By 1867, over 72% of British exports were outside the Empire.
    This growth was a function of industrialisation rather than our trade policy. How else can you explain the USA and Germany overhauling the U.K. economically by 1900 from behind high tariff walls?

    You might find the following interesting: http://lvin.ru/documents/nye/Magnanimous_Albion_-_Free_Trade_and_British_National_Income_1841-1881.pdf
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    geoffw said:

    The Irish border is the EU's problem.
    Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me. All UK consumers would benefit. To offer to impose the EU's Common External Tariff on all our imports in order to protect EU farming and industry at huge administrative expense is a mind-bogglingly stupid form of self-harm.

    Indeed - once the Uk voter is exposed to tariff free shopping from the ROW we will never go back in the EU.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].

    That will no doubt form part of the eventual public inquiry into Brexit and Euroscepticism so that we make sure it never happens again.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Fruit of the poisoned tree (or not, when its Remain doing it...)

    A pro-remain campaign group has been fined £2,000 by the official elections watchdog for failing to declare donations totalling £30,000 in the EU referendum, the Press Association reports. The Electoral Commission said Best for Our Future Ltd failed to include a £20,000 donation from the GMB trade union and a further £10,000 from Unison in its spending return. The two unions were each fined £500 for failing to declare the donations while Unison received a further penalty of £1,000 for late payment of an invoice.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/may/15/brexit-may-accused-of-subverting-devolution-as-msps-prepare-to-refuse-consent-to-eu-withdrawal-bill-politics-live
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].

    That did not seem to stop Cnut from sitting on his throne up to his knees in seawater...

    MPs voted the way the did (and, for many, against their gut feelings) because of the referendum and party whips.

    It is democracy Jim, but not as we know it ;)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    GIN1138 said:
    Unfortunately the only way they can do that is put it to bed by voting Remain in a referendum on the deal.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?

    The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    Bercow is not a fan of convention, what chance he defies it by not being elevated as a crossbench peer whenever he does step down?

    What, and miss the chance to dress up? I think not.
    I remember a great story about Lord Hailsham and his friend Neil Marten.

    One day, when Neil was touring some of his constituents around the the Commons he bumped into Lord H who was processing in full regalia and surrounded by various flunkies.

    Somewhat mischievously, Lord H threw his arm in the air and boomed "Neil" across the room.

    And they all did.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    twitter.com/independent/status/996328440717459456?s=21

    They will soon come crawling back when the UK economy powers forward post-Brexit. They should be listening to the Leavers on PB and not their experts.

    :D
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    edited May 2018
    Number of EU nationals working in Britain has fallen

    Nearly two years after the Brexit vote, we can now see that the number of citizens from other European Union countries working in Britain has fallen.

    The ONS reports that the total EU workforce in Britain fell by 28,000 over the last year. That’s the first annual decrease since January to March 2010.

    Here’s the details from today’s labour market report:

    There were 28.73 million UK nationals working in the UK, 417,000 more than for a year earlier.
    There were 2.29 million EU nationals working in the UK, 28,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
    There were 1.25 million non-EU nationals working in the UK, 20,000 more than for a year earlier.
    The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%)


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live

    Gordon 'British jobs for British Workers' Brown will be pleased
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263
    rkrkrk said:


    You know him much better than I - but I think it's a mistake to lump monarchy, NATO and trident together. He is never going to want nuclear weapons/Trident, but has accepted his party doesn't agree with him for the moment. I expect he will keep pushing to change policy.
    On the monarchy - I don't think he is going to push to change policy, I think it's a much lower-order priority.

    Yes, I agree. I don't actually know many Labour Party members who really care about the monarchy one way or the other - they think it's an odd and unreasonably expensive quirk of British tradition and they decline to get into royal marriages and the like, but they accept that most people seem keen on it and it's really not a priority.

    There are exceptions, some of them otherwise not very left-wing - a bit like people who aren't into animal welfare in general but get really worked up about hunting, they have republicanism as their token left-wing cause (abolishing public schools is an issue that sometimes plays a similar role).
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    As an aside, how do people think the Irish referendum (on abortion) will turn out?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    Note the fieldwork dates.
    twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/996337160012861440

    Do BMG usually have such a lag between fieldwork & publication?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715

    Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?

    The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.

    Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    King Cole, and those representatives then presented the electorate with the referendum, (having voted beforehand to hold it, and afterwards to endorse the result).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957

    GIN1138 said:
    Unfortunately the only way they can do that is put it to bed by voting Remain in a referendum on the deal.
    In June 2016.....
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited May 2018

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    GIN1138 said:
    Unfortunately the only way they can do that is put it to bed by voting Remain in a referendum on the deal.
    In June 2016.....
    I actually agree with you Mark. We need to leave. Brexit must happen.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    O/T Pakistan are chasing 160 to beat Irelnd in the latter’s first Test Match. So far they are 6-1 with all day to bat.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    GIN1138 said:
    Unfortunately the only way they can do that is put it to bed by voting Remain in a referendum on the deal.
    In June 2016.....
    That was a referendum on the unreal, not on the deal.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force

    Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force

    Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?

    The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.

    Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
    That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.

    Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,569
    For the Star Wars fans...
    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/05/14/tunisia-launches-500-mw-solar-tender/
    Through the new tender, the Tunisian government hopes to build a 200 MW solar plant in the province of Tatouine....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715

    King Cole, and those representatives then presented the electorate with the referendum, (having voted beforehand to hold it, and afterwards to endorse the result).

    That still doesn’t mean that after mature reflection, observation of the development of the situation and recognition of the difficulties to be faced, they cannot change their minds.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    edited May 2018

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force

    Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force

    Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.
    Maybe so, but that was after the govt decided that an advisory referendum had legal force on (apparently) no basis other than it would keep the Tory party from splitting.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?

    The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.

    Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
    That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.

    Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
    Manifestoes - Don't forget that Labour went to court to specifically disown theirs a few years back.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    Sean_F said:

    Mr. Glenn, are you familiar with the concept of the right to freedom of self-determination?

    The politicians are there to be servants of the people, not masters. It's why the Lords suddenly deciding they aren't a revising chamber any more and the largest vote in British history matters less than their mighty opinions is really rather dangerous.

    Are you not familar with Burkes Address to the Electors of Bristol? An MP is sent to Parliament to make an informed judgement on the issues of the day. They are not delegates, mandated to vote in a particular way.
    That was fine in the day when the MP represented a tiny number of voters, or the owner of a pocket borough, parties hardly existed, and no one issued manifestos.

    Universal suffrage, manifestos, and parties are now established parts of the political scene.
    True but an MP is still not a delegate. They may have to defend their actions to their supporters, of course.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,543
    edited May 2018

    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].

    Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to end up withless overall from the relationship.

    That contradiction makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,569
    edited May 2018
    You can fool some of the people all of the time...
    https://www.salon.com/2018/05/14/team-trump-plans-to-go-on-war-footing-to-fend-off-impeachment-it-could-backfire-big-time/
    According to a new Economist/YouGov poll, 75 percent of Republicans now agree that the Mueller investigation is a "witch hunt." Only 13 percent of the GOP believe it's legitimate. An alarming 61 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of independents believe the FBI is framing Donald Trump. Only 17 percent of GOP voters disagree with that…
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    FF43 said:

    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].

    Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to get less out of the relationship.

    That contradiction that makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
    I fear you are right!
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Roger said:

    The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.

    (NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/world/middle-east/news/95168/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-uk-response-‘flagrant-illegality’-israeli
    Strange. I thought he was all about dialogue.
    He's not calling for an invasion of Israel!
    just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
    Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
    I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.

    He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.

    Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.

    It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Number of EU nationals working in Britain has fallen

    Nearly two years after the Brexit vote, we can now see that the number of citizens from other European Union countries working in Britain has fallen.

    The ONS reports that the total EU workforce in Britain fell by 28,000 over the last year. That’s the first annual decrease since January to March 2010.

    Here’s the details from today’s labour market report:

    There were 28.73 million UK nationals working in the UK, 417,000 more than for a year earlier.
    There were 2.29 million EU nationals working in the UK, 28,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
    There were 1.25 million non-EU nationals working in the UK, 20,000 more than for a year earlier.
    The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%)


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live

    Gordon 'British jobs for British Workers' Brown will be pleased


    More than 10% of workers in this country are not UK nationals (= foreigners).
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    FF43 said:

    Mr. 43, apologies for the slow reply, been AFK.

    If leaving the EU is so utterly unrealistic, why did MPs vote that it be an option in a referendum?

    [As an aside, Cnut knew he couldn't turn back the sea].

    Leaving the EU is easy. Leaving the EU in such a way that it avoids the worst of Project Fear (and be clear, the narrow Leave majority was won on the implicit promise that nothing we like would change) requires the UK to go from participation in EU decision-making to doing what we are told by an organisation that no longer represents us. The only real reason for the UK to leave the EU was to gain control and yet we give up our influence to get less out of the relationship.

    That contradiction that makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.
    If avoiding practical dislocations is a true red line then there's only one way to do Brexit, and if that's the only way to do Brexit, almost nobody wants it.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force

    Then Ms Gina Miller obliged by taking the government to the High Court, which forced them to present and pass the Withdrawal from the European Union Bill which has got legal force

    Ms Miller, Brexit Heroine.

    Surely, (at the time) Ms Miller only wanted to ensure that the UK parliament took back control - so pro democracy?

    Subsequently it seems she is not happy with the way they voted - so not so keen on democracy.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    FF43 said:



    That contradiction makes Brexit interesting. Somehow the circle will need to be squared. This will play out for decades.

    The notion that Brexit will be "done and dusted" and we'll all have moved on by the next GE (or the one after that) is laughable.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
    As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."

    https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    ONS statement

    Commenting on today’s productivity figures, ONS deputy chief economist Richard Heys said:

    “Labour productivity fell by 0.5% in the first three months of the year, as a result of continued strength in employment growth combined with weaker output growth. Productivity can be volatile, and despite this quarterly fall the underlying picture is one of modest growth with productivity 1.0% higher than a year ago.”


    Commenting on today’s labour market figures, senior ONS statistician Matt Hughes said:

    "With employment up again in the three months to March, the rate has hit a new record, with unemployment remaining at its lowest rate since 1975.

    “The growth in employment is still being driven by UK nationals, with a slight drop over the past year in the number of foreign workers. It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t a measure of migration.

    “Growth in total pay remains in line with inflation, meaning real earnings are flat on the year.”

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    Charles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:
    Lol It'd cost me 5p per mile to run my car in the states.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Pulpstar said:

    Charles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:
    Lol It'd cost me 5p per mile to run my car in the states.
    They aren't proper gallons (unless Charles has done the conversion).
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
    As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."

    https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593

    Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Charles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:
    Lol It'd cost me 5p per mile to run my car in the states.
    They aren't proper gallons (unless Charles has done the conversion).
    I've allowed for that.
  • tim80tim80 Posts: 99
    If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.

    Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    rkrkrk said:


    You know him much better than I - but I think it's a mistake to lump monarchy, NATO and trident together. He is never going to want nuclear weapons/Trident, but has accepted his party doesn't agree with him for the moment. I expect he will keep pushing to change policy.
    On the monarchy - I don't think he is going to push to change policy, I think it's a much lower-order priority.

    Yes, I agree. I don't actually know many Labour Party members who really care about the monarchy one way or the other - they think it's an odd and unreasonably expensive quirk of British tradition and they decline to get into royal marriages and the like, but they accept that most people seem keen on it and it's really not a priority.

    There are exceptions, some of them otherwise not very left-wing - a bit like people who aren't into animal welfare in general but get really worked up about hunting, they have republicanism as their token left-wing cause (abolishing public schools is an issue that sometimes plays a similar role).
    57% of Labour voters think the monarchy is good for Britain according to Yougov

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/08/monarchy-here-stay/
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
    As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."

    https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593

    Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
    It's been two years since the referendum. How long exactly do you think Cameron should have spent on it?
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Roger said:

    The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.

    (NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/world/middle-east/news/95168/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-uk-response-‘flagrant-illegality’-israeli
    Strange. I thought he was all about dialogue.
    He's not calling for an invasion of Israel!
    just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
    Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
    I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.

    He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.

    Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.

    It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
    But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841
    I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
    As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."

    https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593

    Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
    It's been two years since the referendum. How long exactly do you think Cameron should have spent on it?
    Enough.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    geoffw said:

    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    geoffw said:


    Why we don't unilaterally abolish all tariffs and duties beats me.

    Because political forces impact economic policy choices. For starters you'd have manufacturing and farming up in arms.
    I work for a manufacturer, abolition of all tariffs would do us no harm at all.
    Sure abolition of all tariffs.
    But unilateral abolition by the UK without other countries reciprocating would give other countries an unfair advantage.
    The LSE blog did a nice little piece on unilateral abolition of tariffs here:
    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-britain-alone-scenario-how-economists-for-brexit-defy-the-laws-of-gravity/

    N.B. a leading proponent for the idea predicts that it would mostly eliminate UK manufacturing.
    There is nothing to stop our own standards and regulations matching those of the EU. That eliminates non-tariff barriers as an impediment to trade with the EU 27. Indeed we start off from that very position.
    If it's only the starting point and some of it will change, then it's still an impediment to trade, because you still need the infrastructure to handle the coming differences (customs etc), and investment decisions have to account for the possibility that you won't be able to get stuff across the border because standards diverge.

    You can of course commit to follow whatever they do, but that's the exact opposite of taking back control.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Roger said:

    The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.

    (NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/world/middle-east/news/95168/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-uk-response-‘flagrant-illegality’-israeli
    Strange. I thought he was all about dialogue.
    He's not calling for an invasion of Israel!
    just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
    Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
    I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.

    He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.

    Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.

    It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
    But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
    Seems unlikely he would have spent Passover with the Israeli government
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880



    If avoiding practical dislocations is a true red line then there's only one way to do Brexit, and if that's the only way to do Brexit, almost nobody wants it.


    You'll never live like gammon people.
    You'll never do whatever gammon people do.
    You'll never fail like gammon people.
    You'll never watch your life slide out of view.

    Sing along with the gammon people
    Sing along and it might just get you through
    Laugh along with the gammon people

    Laugh along even though they're laughing at you
    And the stupid things that you do
    Because you think that poor is cool.






  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    ONS statement

    Commenting on today’s productivity figures, ONS deputy chief economist Richard Heys said:

    “Labour productivity fell by 0.5% in the first three months of the year, as a result of continued strength in employment growth combined with weaker output growth. Productivity can be volatile, and despite this quarterly fall the underlying picture is one of modest growth with productivity 1.0% higher than a year ago.”


    Commenting on today’s labour market figures, senior ONS statistician Matt Hughes said:

    "With employment up again in the three months to March, the rate has hit a new record, with unemployment remaining at its lowest rate since 1975.

    “The growth in employment is still being driven by UK nationals, with a slight drop over the past year in the number of foreign workers. It’s important to remember, though, that this isn’t a measure of migration.

    “Growth in total pay remains in line with inflation, meaning real earnings are flat on the year.”

    The growth in employment (and wages) in the first quarter suggests that GDP numbers for that quarter will eventually be revised upwards.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Mrs C, Cnut was making a point about the limits of temporal authority compared to God's ineffable might.

    I know. That fact that he had to do something so blindingly obvious says a lot about his courtiers. These days we seem to have an inverse Cnut with Brexit where people run around telling us that we can defy the large economic bloc on our doorstep and that said bloc will bend to the will of the Brexit-kings.

    It's also worth noting the party with said referendum promise won a majority in the preceding election. And that MPs then voted to endorse the decision of the electorate in the Commons.

    It is also worth noting that the referendum was advisory and had no legal force. It is worth further noting that A50 did not have to be triggered before we were ready to do so and had put our frameworks and plans in place.
    The legislation said that the referendum was advisory; the government however said that
    "This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide."
    Which is moving the goalposts. Legislation cannot be amended by press release, so a Labour government could in theory ignore the commitment, but the government which actually made it obviously can't. God, Cameron was a disaster.
    As I said in December 2016, "Cameron left politics because he knew that he had set his country up for the humiliation to end all humiliations by allowing it to vote for something that cannot be delivered."

    https://politicalbetting.vanillacommunity.com/discussion/comment/1386593/#Comment_1386593

    Or Cameron left for gross negligence by not providing for the exit option in advance.
    It's been two years since the referendum. How long exactly do you think Cameron should have spent on it?
    Enough.
    The original sin of Brexit was not including a negotiating position in the referendum. The official leave campaign should have been asked to provide a 1 page summary of what our aims and red lines would be, and the vote should have been on implementing that.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    tim80 said:

    If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.

    Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.

    If Bercow went to the backbenches he could finally speak out in parliament and elsewhere on behalf of his constituents about HS2, East/West Rail, the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway and associated big City plans, the Incinerator and all the other major disruptions taking place in his constituency.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    People who went to Uni and younger people tended to vote to Remain.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,038
    tim80 said:

    If Bercow is forced out this year I would not put it past him to go to the backbenches and cause maximum trouble for the Government. He's no respect for convention or proprietary.

    Of course, he could then become the first MP to face recall, especially if more emerges on the bullying allegations.

    Is there an interesting, and possibly unanswerable, constitutional question if that happens? He avoided facing a GE vote because he was the Speaker at the time. If he returns to the backbench rather than the standard resigns his seat to go to Lords - what is the position?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    edited May 2018
    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Charles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:
    Lol It'd cost me 5p per mile to run my car in the states.
    They aren't proper gallons (unless Charles has done the conversion).
    per US gallon to be fair
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mrs C, we can certainly agree that May's execution of the decision is wanting.

    King Cole, it would be legal for the Commons to do that. And cause immense political damage and distrust.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Roger said:

    The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.

    (NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/world/middle-east/news/95168/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-uk-response-‘flagrant-illegality’-israeli
    Strange. I thought he was all about dialogue.
    He's not calling for an invasion of Israel!
    just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
    Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
    I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.

    He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.

    Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.

    It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
    But does Corbyn separate the 'Israeli government' from 'Jews' in his mind, in his statements and in his actions?
    It's why thought crime is so difficult. I would tend to see "anti-Semitic" as being dependent on motive (why you say what you do) rather than an objective statement.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
    It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.

    You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
    It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.

    You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
    This is not quite what you want but might be relevant.
    https://twitter.com/marwood_lennox/status/956998702979276800
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,841

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
    It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.

    You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
    This is not quite what you want but might be relevant.
    https://twitter.com/marwood_lennox/status/956998702979276800
    https://jamestrimble.github.io/imdmaps/eimd2015/
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
    It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.

    You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
    This is not quite what you want but might be relevant.
    https://twitter.com/marwood_lennox/status/956998702979276800
    Thanks.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    test
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,911
    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.

    OTOH, the BJP have zero presence in my native Kerala.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.

    OTOH, the BJP have zero presence in my native Kerala.
    I thought you were native to Essex?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.

    OTOH, the BJP have zero presence in my native Kerala.
    I thought you were native to Essex?
    Ilford is technically Greater London not Essex
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,911

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.

    OTOH, the BJP have zero presence in my native Kerala.
    I thought you were native to Essex?
    Um, from when I was 4 months old ;)

    Which of course means that when I first arrived in the UK, I couldn't speak a word of English :lol:
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Charles said:

    tlg86 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    JonathanD said:

    JonathanD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Wages up by 0.4% YoY.

    No?

    "Latest estimates show that average weekly earnings for employees in Great Britain in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) increased by 0.2% excluding bonuses, and by 0.1% including bonuses, compared with a year earlier."

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/april2018#average-weekly-earnings
    Out of date.

    Published today:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/may2018

    Thanks, although that is worse as it shows a 0% total pay rise over the last year.
    How the Guardian is reporting it:

    Basic pay rising faster than inflation

    Today’s jobs report also shows that Britain’s cost of living squeeze is easing.

    Basic pay (excluding bonuses) rose by 2.9% in the first quarter of 2018, up from 2.8% a month ago.

    That means that wages are rising faster than inflation (which fell to 2.5% in March).

    So real basic pay (adjusted for inflation) are now growing at around 0.4%, after shrinking over recent months.

    However, total pay (including bonuses) only grew by 2.6% during the quarter (again, down from 2.8%).


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2018/may/15/german-growth-slows-trade-uk-unemployment-wage-growth-business-live
    Won’t there be a rise in inflation soon? Fuelled (ahem) by petrol prices.
    £1.247 at the ASDA yesterday, the local (expensive) station I pass by on my way to work was £1.329 !

    Sure I remember filling up for around £1.179 a month or two back..
    The Shell garage at Markham Vale was £1.449 for diesel! I went to the Morrisons in Staveley and paid £1.249 instead.
    £2.44 at Shell in Laguna Beach.

    *Per gallon*

    :tongue:

    Yes but everything in the US is further apart, so per journey it costs the same.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    Pulpstar said:

    I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.

    Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.

    And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.

    My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,911
    edited May 2018

    MaxPB said:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-44119045

    Another example of polls underestimating the nationalist choice.

    OTOH, the BJP have zero presence in my native Kerala.
    Actually, I lie. The BJP won a single seat (out of 140) at the 2016 State Election.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_Legislative_Assembly_election,_2016
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Charles said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Elliot said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Roger said:

    The news channels are wall to wall Israeli brutality. It'll be interesting if Corbyn for once is able to step up to the plate or whether he'll be intimidated by the shadow of Guido and the 'Friends of Israel' in his own party.

    (NB Jeremy Bowen is one of the few journalists worth listening to because he has a real knowledge of the history of the region)

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/world/middle-east/news/95168/jeremy-corbyn-blasts-uk-response-‘flagrant-illegality’-israeli
    Strange. I thought he was all about dialogue.
    He's not calling for an invasion of Israel!
    just talking about suspending arms sales (which I imagine is essentially symbolic/pointless), and respect for international law.
    Nobody was calling for an invasion of Russia either, but he still focused on not blaming anyone and calling for nothing to provoke Russia. But then Russia isn't run by Jews.
    I honestly don't think it's anti-Semitic in Corbyn's case.

    He just reflexively opposes anyone who is friendly with the Americans and hence Israel is the worst of the worst.

    Unfortunately that means that he is comfortable associating with a lot of deeply unpleasant people ("my enemy's enemy") and his movement is highly attractive to people who really are anti-Semitic. He then doesn't take action against anti-Semites in his party because they are allies in the fight against America's friends.

    It's a nasty mindset and one that should be kept well away from government, but not sure it's anti-Semitic
    I think that's right although he has spent so long criticising Israel, which is populated and run by Jews, that by this time it would be amazing if he hadn't come to believe that it is actually the Jews which are the problem.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    rcs1000 said:

    However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?

    You make it sound like they're suffering from dementia.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,678


    Also, don’t forget that a couple of one-off factors like the cold winter weather, early Easter vacation and strikes probably distorted first quarter data.

    I always love 'one off factors'. It's a way of pretending things that happen fairly regularly won't happen again EVER, so we can all discount this and pretend the 'underlying' results are much better than they are.

    One off - cold winter? Happens about once every four quarters I reckon.
    Early Easter - happens probably once every three years.
    Strikes - Happen all the time.

    Good for a laugh that. Economists deluding themselves again.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    O/T is there anywhere I can find how people voted in the EU referendum by both class and political allegiance?

    ie I'm trying to find out what the split was between middle and working class Conservatives, and middle and working class Labour voters.

    Is this what you’re after?

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2016-eu-referendum
    It comes close, but it doesn't have the information I'm looking for.

    You can see how people voted by sex/class and age/class but not by political allegiance/class
    The Ashcroft exit poll is probably closest but not exact.

    Breaks down by class and political allegiance but not together. However based on the poll I would expect AB Tories may have voted Remain and C2 and DE Labour voters may have voted Leave despite Tory voters overall voting Leave and Labour voters overall voting Remain

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.

    Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.

    And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.

    My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
    The Tories held Buckingham comfortably in 1997 and 2001 before Bercow became Speaker and with the Tories ahead in most national polls I doubt the LDs have any real chance. It was also pretty evenly split in the EU referendum unlike Richmond Park which was over 70% Remain
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,749
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,766
    HYUFD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    I think the Lib Dems could push 30% or so in a Buckingham by-election. They'll definitely get more votes there than Lewisham.

    Buckingham is not that different a seat to the host of wealthy Southern market towns the LibDems used to hold: Eastleigh, Bath, Winchester, etc.

    And I think you can probably allocate all the "Pro EU Conservative Party" votes to the LibDems in a by-election, and a reasonable portion of the (small) Labour vote.

    My guess is that the LibDems could nab it on a good day. However, how many good days do the LibDems have with Vince as leader?
    The Tories held Buckingham comfortably in 1997 and 2001 before Bercow became Speaker and with the Tories ahead in most national polls I doubt the LDs have any real chance. It was also pretty evenly split in the EU referendum unlike Richmond Park which was over 70% Remain
    In the old days, the LibDems would grab a seat like Winchester against the government, eight times out of ten. But as my comment implied, I wouldn't expect them to manage it this time around.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited May 2018
    Sorry but I think the LDs have had it. Being a general NOTA, what are you rebelling against Party is fine and as we saw, such a theoretical position had a very strong attraction pre-2010.

    Since then, not only have they had contact with reality, which didn't suit their supporters all that much, but they are positioning themselves as a single issue NOTA Party which doesn't really work.

    Perhaps best would be to do a UKIP and turn into a single issue pressure group seeking to rejoin the EU. And who knows, in 20 years or so they may very well be successful.
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900
    edited May 2018
    @mods : you might want to know that PB currently is running those scam bitcoin adverts, with the fake Dragon's Den quotes. I know you probably have little influence over what ads google choose there, but might be worth looking at (especially since they're getting sued for the fake endorsements by Peter Jones).
This discussion has been closed.