Did ICM carry out today’s Populus poll?
November 11th, 2008
How come the firms have such different results?
Above is the rather anonymous office block in Bedford which houses the ICM calling centre where, more than likely, the field-work for today’s Populus poll in the Times was carried out.
“ICM calling centre..”, I can hear you saying,”.. surely some mistake?” No - because the process of doing the telephone interviews is something that Populus usually contracts out and ICM are a leader in this field.
There are other similarities as well. The whole architecture used by Populus is very close to ICM. Both use past vote weighting to ensure a politically balanced samples, both use responses to the “certainty to vote” questions to finalise their results and both use the so-called “spiral of silence adjuster” to deal with those who say they are voting but won’t name the party.
So why is it that in the space of five days one firm could be showing a 13 point Tory lead and the other a 6 point one? The answer is that in addition to any Glenrothes effect the pollsters use different forms of question and their mathematical calculations are not the same.
I’ve argued here before that the wording of the ICM question is more favourable to the Lib Dems and this seems to have a greater impact on Labour than the Tories. Secondly it’s down to the past vote weighting formula.
In order to ensure that samples are politically balanced both firms ask how respondents voted last time and then apply a weighting. This is how it works:-
So the views of those who say they voted Labour in 2005 count for more when Populus work out their headline numbers than with ICM. The views of 2005 Lib Dem supporters count for less.
The reason that the weightings are not the actual shares from 2005 is to deal with an element of “misremembering”. In addition to past vote weighting variances the Populus “spiral of silence” adjustment is less favourable to the Lib Dems.
All this means that other things being equal one would expect that Populus polls would have a slightly bigger Labour share than ICM and a smaller Lib Dem one.
When both firms publish the detailed data from their latest surveys I hope to return to this subject again.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
So does this mean that you could take the raw data and apply your own filter to produce a PB.com poll output. I appreciate that it would be “out of date” as the figures take a few days to come through but perhaps the weight of knowledge/experience on here could produce a more accurate weighting. If you could then allow for the different style of questioning would you then be able to have a slightly better method of comparing polls from different companies
Oh and I believe it is customary to say “first”
Last-but-437
I do like the word ‘misremembering’.
Would “There has been no ‘boom’ and there will be no ‘bust’. Just 11 years of moderate growth to be followed by a relatively short period of moderate recession.” count as misremembering or is there a better word?
Talking of whom…
Gabble Check List for Tuesday, 11 November, 2008
FTSE 100 opens at 4403.92
Optimistic milestones to watch for:
4455.60 - up 51.68 (1.17%) to return to 2nd May 1997 level
5385.90 - up 981.98 (22.30%) to come out of current bear market
5589.37 - up 1185.45 (26.92%) to match DOW performance since 2 May 97
5882.66 - up 1478.74 (33.58%) to match CAC performance since 2 May 97
6330.07 - up 1926.15 (43.47%) to match inflation (42.07%) since 2 May 97
6470.86 - up 2066.94 (46.93%) to match DAX performance since 2 May 97
6527.60 - up 2123.68 (48.22%) to return to Blair’s 27th June 2007 level
6930.20 - up 2526.28 (57.36%) to equal all-time high on 30 Dec 99
Pessimistic milestones to watch for:
3460.00 - down 943.92 (-21.43%) to reach Madasafish’s interim low
3287.00 - down 1116.92 (-25.36%) to return to Blair’s low on 12 Mar 03
2780.00 - down 1623.92 (-36.87%) to reach Madasafish’s low low
2144.30 - down 2259.62 (-51.31%) to return to 28th Nov 90 (exit Maggie!)
The direction of the stock market is important for savers and pension funds over the long term, but not the main concern at the moment.
3 — “is there a better word?”
Four letters, ends in ‘t’, and Gabble’s full of it. (No, not ‘tact’.)
The difference is pretty miniscule though Mike. The real reasons there’s a difference is that:
1. the narrative has shifted further Brown’s way
2. interest rates and, more importantly mortgage rates, were cut. Note especially the favourable headlines about the Govt pressurising the banks in this regard
3. Glenrothes. Everyone likes backing a winner.
4. MOE
We can add 5. your weighting point, but should only do so in conjunction with 1 to 4.
7 points is “pretty miniscule”?
Mike, did you not notice interest rates being cut by one and a half percent?
7- he means the weighting differences are pretty miniscule
9. alex.
Does he? His “reasons” don’t seem to bear that out.
“TOKYO (Nikkei)–Japan’s gigantic public pension fund, the world’s largest, is poised to start a long process of drawing down its assets to continue financing the pension system for this rapidly aging nation, with huge economic implications.”
I know sixe isn’t everything, but how big is ours?
“size” of course
10 - yes they do. He’s saying that the weighting differences are pretty miniscule and the actual reasons for the fairly large shift are…
7. and 10. yes I didn’t reply because I thought Alex’s response made it fairly obvious. The miniscule refers to the weighting. The difference is very small, and certainly doesn’t account for the 7% lead difference. My points 1 to 4 help to fill in the gaps, and there may be other reasons to add. I think those are the key ones though.
I do detect a slight problem on pb.com sometimes (including from our host): an unwillingness to believe anyone is actually shifting towards Labour. It’s time to snap out of this because it is distorting a proper reading of the mood and, in the case of Glenrothes, can leave the place looking a little out of touch.
Personally I think a post on the last thread explained what was happening the best. That is that people think we’re currently experiencing the worst of the recession and things feel pretty good. Most have still got their jobs, the shops are packed with bargain deals being offered all over the place and the Govt are falling over themselves to give us more money.
When the reality is that every thing cited above is evidence that the worst for the average voter is very much still to come.
Hmmm looks like, ‘no overall majority’ might be moving into being, ‘betting favourite’
p.s.
Standby for seant’s posts reversing everything he said yesterday.
14. That’s understandable, Richard. I for one would rather not believe that my fellow citizens can be so stupid.
12-1 on obama being assassinated
http://www.gambling911.com/politics/obama-assassination-bet-bad-taste-odds-still-offered-110708.html
thoughts? bad taste?
Have to agree with Richard to a large extent though in Glenrothes even Labour was signalling they’d lost it as well as a range of other pundits.
Heats off Brown and he hasn’t made the media relations mistakes he made with the election that never was. Perhaps an indication that the finessing of their media expectations message has changed with the return of the old hands.
How this pans out over the months to come will depend on how bad the recession gets and how he responds to it but I wouldn’t rule out the factor that there is a section of the population who do “hang on to nurse” as Nick Robinson said.
15
When you mean the, ‘worse to come’ what do you mean? For some yes, but not the majority, many people will benefit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1084657/Prices-plunge-high-street-giving-hope-rate-cuts.html
They’ll feel sorry for those that don’t, but will it influence their vote?
re 14. Richard - You talk about the changes being minuscule - they are not in polling terms. If Labour is being overstated by 3 and the Lib Dems understated by 3 then the Labour seat total drops by 30 on the Wells projector and the Tory total increases by 18. A ten seat gap becomes a 48 seat gap which is massive for those of us who risk a pile on the commons seats spread betting markets.
You have just “discovered” Labour - fine - but how much are you betting at the moment? I am currently a Labour buyer at £50 a seat. So a thirty seat shift would cost/win me £1500 which is a pretty big proportion of my after tax monthly income.
Here we have two polls from highly respected pollster with fieldwork over five consecutive days showing very different outcomes.
I am trying to explain the methodological differences. If you are not happy then I am sure there are plenty of other sites you can go to - but do not question my motives. I am taking the financial risk.
“I do like the word ‘misremembering’.”
So do I.
I am ALWAYS misremembering how the Tory Party has supported the Iraq war. And ‘lighter regulation of the city’.
The of course NO ONE misremembers their morality on stuffing their pockets with tax-payer-funded allowances like certain Tory MEPs and MPs. And for those who don’t, there’s always yachts in the Mediterranean.
18-Bad taste but no worse than the talk on here about Palin succeeding McCain. Even between election and inauguration.
4/43 presidents have been assassinated
and
4/43 died in office
22. I’m sure Mandy would agree with you. But it’s certainly more exotic than some buider’s semi-detached ex coucil house in the Northe East, is it not? to be fair ‘they’ didn’t actually ‘enjoy’ hospitality there, just took the money.
24. oops! ‘there’, ‘North’ and ‘council’. Apologies. Rush of blood.
re 18 and 23. I think that the market must have been taken down by PaddyPower.
On the subject of morality …
Abrahams’ “disguised” donations to the Labour party were described by the Prime Minister as illegal. The case was referred to the police by the Electoral Commission on 29th November 2007.
Scotland Yard reported on 26 June 2008 that detectives investigating the case handed their main file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service.
A decision should have been taken by now as to whether there is sufficient evidence to charge anyone. Have the CPS misremembered or are they being instructed to dither?
Hmm. It’s entirely possible that the poll is simply rogue. Questioning 1,000 or so people, even with proper weighting, isn’t guaranteed to give an accurate snapshot of public opinion.
27, a backbencher should raise this in the Commons. It’d get him slapped on the wrist by Gorbals, but might take the wind out of the Labour’s sails and perhaps remind a few journalists about the matter.
#297 Last Thread - Nick Palmer
Brown’s plan?
…
2. Lean on the banks to pass on the BoE’s interest rates (tick)
…
Contractually the banks had to pass the rates on to tracker customers, outside of this there were 800,000 or so SVR mortgages who have benefitted by the banks being ‘lent on’. For the majority of customers on fixed rates there is no immediate benefit.
The banking business is almost a zero sum game, they pass on the interest rate cuts to borrowers by reducing that paid to depositers who may of course be pensioners.
At the moment the banks need to repair their battered balance sheets - this means they must increase their margins and so their game is to remove net funds from the economy.
On topic, for a change. Presumably voters memories decay with age - but some voters actually die and cant now be contacted by ICM or anyone else. If a higher proportion of 2005 Conservative voters die than Labour and Lib Dem then you are less likely to find them than those of the other parties. (In the October ICM poll 49% of over 65 voters said they would vote Conservative compared to only 31% of 18 -24 years old.)
31, but if that figure stays the same it strengthens the Tories’ hand as the population overall is ageing, and older people vote more than younger people.
29.
The CPS is corrupt. Discuss. (Marks will be deducted for any response longer than four words).
I know of one government minister who was very probably only elected because of gross (unlawful) electoral impropriety which was reported to the police but nothing further happened. How much is a Minister’s salary (plus perks) for five years?
31. Equally, Tory voters would be therefore more unlikely to make it to the next election… So, if we are at the mid term the Tory vote would be right, otherwise it would always be either over or understated? This has no statistical validity but it’s great fun.
30 “banking business is almost a zero sum game”.
Less than zero, recently, hence our current pickle.
[32] Our Genial Host wrote
Well, Mike would advise people never to bet more than they can afford and I am sure that he takes his own advice.
What his buying Labour on the spreads suggests to me is that he doesn’t believe Smithson’s Law. Or perhaps he does, and he intends to cover himself with some Tory buys later on. It’s all far too complicated for me. Wasn’t this whole financial catastrophe caused by a sophisticated version of spread betting anyway?
‘…the telephonre interviews…’
Here in the hated Mainstream Media we tend to insist on ‘telephone’ but that’s probably just a sign of how elitist we are.
re 36. But Nick in the MSM you have teams of people to pick up things like this.
Partial answers to Mike’s question yesterday - in thread and in large type “where are the Labour backers?”:
1. There seems to be a slight pro-Tory bias in betting markets which might account for some resistance to the odds finding their natural level.
2. Those who bet on politics will, in general, be more engaged with the political process and, presumably, will have a clearer view of our current economic position than those who think we’re in the midst of the recession and it’s actually quite nice. These happy punters can back the Tories, relaxed that the situation is going to get much worse. So long-term likely outcomes inhibit short-term market movement of the kind which Mike bets on.
Since Glenrothes, the betfair odds on a Tory majority have tightened slightly, i/r cut, polls and narrative notwithstanding.
That said, I’m still backing No Overall Majority. It may be a few months before the recession starts to bite hard. If during this period Mandy and co keep winning the battles (post offices to stay open?) and Osborne remains anonymous then there’s time for a few more polls in this territory and the odds to move.
re 31. Icarus. So the dead don’t vote where you live? That’s a novel concept!!
33. Certainly the CPS is incompetent. Commosn sense really, the state can never match what the private sector is prepared to pay so you end up with a load of lawyers who are not worthy of the private sector.
28
Mike! Smithsons law has just been broken, rejecting a poll ‘cos you don’t like the result. I demand insist even, that Morris Dancer is placed in the, ’sinbin.
36 A Guardian media group journalist complaining about typos? Oh the irony.
20. Falling prices is very bad for the economy. In previous recessions a lot of competitiveness is regained by simply allowing wages and product prices to rise by less than inflation. Outright falls in product prices means pressure on wages - wage prices are particularly sticky (it’s difficult to get wage cuts) and it tends to lead to greater losses in employment.
For firms falling prices also mean far less ability to pay debt. Even if interest rates fall to 3% (got to add back in the bank margin - so that equates to 1%ish on base rates), falling top line sales is very bad. Debt remains the same and rises, sales, profits fall by the fall in prices.
For those interested in following this question - ignore commodity prices (it’ll be a wash - might even help the firms as they pocket some of the fall). Ignore the prices of imported semi-durables (AV equipment), and even cars. The big question is whether deflation hits services - a wholly domestic area. If aggregate demand for services declines by enough, things are going to become very ugly. At the moment service prices appear to be rising about 4%ish (higher commodity prices), but rises are not in line with the wider CPI.
Falling prices and falling interest rates are not a good thing. The MPC wouldnt be cutting rates this aggressively if they didnt fear something very nasty. I suspect that everyone will be surprised at the rate at which unemployment rises and by business failures. Some people will be better off, but it is going to be a minority, most people will be belt-tightening in preparation for the recession.
re 38 I don’t think there is a pro-Tory bias amongst political gamblers. Even when polls were suggesting 150+ Tory majorities the highest the spread markets ever got to was a buy level of 356 seats for the party - a majority of 62.
At the last election the Tory spreads closed at a buy of 190 seats - they got 198. In 1997 and 2001 it was the other way round.
People who risk good money this far out from an election don’t let their personal allegiances get in the way of making a profit.
There’s nothing wrong with Mike exploring the differences between institutes, especially as it helps explain if one moves out of line with the others. For example, if there’s suddenly some very good publicity about the LDs, we could expect ICM to reflect it more strongly since Mike’s pointed out that their wording seems to help draw attention to them. A more important difference is perhaps between YouGov, who don’t weight by certainty to vote, and everyone else, who do so in different ways: since certainty varies quickly according to national mood, this ought to make, say, ComRes more volatile than YouGov (though an eve-of-poll ComRes might be a better predictor than YouGov for the same reason). For trends there is no substitute for comparing results from the same institute, so it doesn’t detract from the startling Populus swing.
18: It’s bad taste and brings political betting in disrepute, because anyone who takes the bet is going at some level to start hoping it happens. If that doesn’t bother you, try extrapolating to even more drastic things - spread bets on the number of victims in a terrorist attack? There are plenty of things for bookmakers to offer odds on: they don’t need to go there.
41, er, no. I didn’t say it was a rogue, I said it was entirely possible it was one.
Also, I rejected the 52% Tory rating in one poll that gave them a 28pt lead.
[41] That assumes that all lawyers are greedy bloodsucking leeches who are only interested in maximising their income. (I should say at this point that none of my family or friends is a lawyer.)
Presumably the proposition could be tested by comparing the results obtained by Law Centres with those achieved by firms in private practice in the same fields. Dunno if such a study has ever been undertaken.
For those who missed it, Cameron didn’t perform well on the BBC couch this morning. He wasn’t as relaxed as he has been in the past, seemed a little flustered and was irritated by Sian Williams’ approach (which in itself is fair enough - most people would be).
It strikes me that Cameron needs to be careful with this new proposal. It is a perfectly good idea in itself, but it is open to misinterpretation that the Tories are doing this to help businesses rather than individuals, and the charge that it amounts to spitting on a bonfire may stick - i.e. loss-making business will not employ extra staff for the sake of accessing a marginal tax benefit. In the current climate I am not sure this proposal will gain the traction the party needs it to, and if anything it risks being subsumed by the Government as a very minor part of a very dramatic shift in tax policy, which will make the Tories look like pygmies.
However, unlike a lot of the wets on here, I remain very optimistic about the Tories’ prospects of winning the next election with a comfortable majority, as I have been for a long time. The current shift in the polls is, I believe, temporary and will present excellent betting opportunities when the markets follow.
Finally, at the risk of igniting the anti-BBC element, I have to say that Sian Williams was dreadful this morning. She couldn’t understand some pretty basic economic concepts Cameron had explained quite clearly and was determined to try to get Cameron to admit this was either an unfunded spending pledge or a benefit cut (wtf?) or both. Having Sian interview senior politicians on economic matters is a mistake - where does this end up? Ant and Dec on Stephen Hawking? Kerry Katona: the Rusdie interview? She also selectively referred to parts of the recent polls which have been bad for the Tories, without acknowledging their overall lead in the polls (and indeed dismissing Cameron when he mentioned it). I’m not a BBC conspiracy theorist, but they do add fuel to the fire sometimes.
46
Arrr! ‘yer sweating and wriggling now. I’ll ask for an adjudication from the master himself, but I think that was a clear breaking of ‘The Law’
p.s.
What you’ll be saying when the next poll shows Labour and Tories neck and neck I don’t know?
47. ‘That assumes that all lawyers are greedy bloodsucking leeches’
Yes and?
I accept that not all lawyers are bad (my father for instance), but it’s he who gives me the examples to ineptness in the CPS. CPS lawyers are in the main raggy dolls.
[51] My only experience came as a juror recently. When we failed to agree a verdict on one count, the prosecution was unable to advise the judge whether or not they would be seeking a retrial. (We had found the defendant guilty of the other charge.)
Since this is a possible outcome of any case you’d think the CPS would work out in advance what they wanted to do in this situation. The judge was not impressed.
48 re Cameron on BBC. Senior politicians of all stripes tend to prefer soft interviews. Neither they nor we should be surprised when the interviewer is not fully briefed on economic minutiae.
One soft interviewer who was often surprisingly good, by the way, was Simon Bates when he was on LBC a few years back.
45. Ah, yes, spread betting on terrorist events - a brilliant idea at the Pentagon. And the man in charge? Blow me down with a feather if it wasnt Admiral Poindexter, the fall guy from Iran Contra. I think it was when they revealed Poindexter was at DARPA in 2002 was when I realised that the Cheney/Rumsfeld mob had no shame.
51. Doesn’t sound unusual. One of the most incompetent cases I’ve seen recently is the race fixing trial with Fallon and co. Hopeless case full of obvious holes.
Just a warning to those who throw the term Nazi around on this site!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/talksport-suspends-gaunt-for-nazi-jibe-1009574.html
One can be sure this poll will get a lot more oxygen than some others.
Mike [39] - its not just the dead who vote - you don’t ever have to have lived to get a vote in the UK. I recently registered my brother on the register, he lives mainly in Budapest but thought that an entry on the UK electoral register is useful to him (something about getting a gun licence to kill animals) There appeared to be no checks that he actually exists. I am afraid that the Tories have one more vote here (unless I lie about his proxy - which I wouldn’t, would I….).
Saddened to see that the Justice Department brushed off a request from all three party leaders in Birmingham last week to stop postal voting on demand. On reason given was that it would reduce “turnout”.
The point of the spread-bet on terrorist attacks was the movement in the market would alert security forces into an attack being planned, and thus help the plot be foiled and save lives.
So, exactly how many lives would have to be saved before the “shame” because worth it? 10? 100? 1000? Personally, I dont give a damn how much “shame” someone somewhere didnt have if it saved my life.
There is an argument against betting markets on atrocities, but it isnt anything to do with abstract concepts like someone’s “shame”. The serious argument is that the possibility of making big money could tempt some people to actually fulfil the bet. However, the mere act of putting on wads of cash would be likely to alert the authorities…
57. Delightful - a real Soviet mentality at work there, it’s all about quantity and to hell with quality. Quite appropriate given the backgrounds of many in the government I suppose.
@55:
To be fair, he called the man a small-n nazi, which was entirely justified in the context.
58. What I didnt understand was how such a market would allow those with foreknowledge to bet without later being apprehended by the authorities. I always thought this was something of a weakness. Also if I were a terrorist who wanted to make money off an attack, there is always the stock market and spread betting.
re 48 this seemed to be the BBC line-to-take this morning. Humphreys was at it on the Today programme and went on and on and on about it being an unfunded tax cut. It took Nick Robinson to point out to him that it was a well known accounting fiddle (and I mean that not in a pejorative sense).
58 So best not to email Betfair and ask Biden to be included in the 2012 President market then.
re 57 Icarus we both know that even if the turnout exceeded 100% in some elections, this ogvernment would see no problem, only triumph.
A desperate, slightly panicky air permeated this morning’s tory presentation.
Cameron was speaking from what looked like a clown’s lecturn. There was no shoulder-to-shoulder with Osborne who, along with Grayling, was sat some distance away to the side. All three looking nervous and…well…panicked under questioning.
“ogvernment?” Chris careful, mistakes are no longer allowed- the wrath of Nick Cohen will surely descend on you!!
65. Ludicrous post even for you Gabble.
If you want something to do, have a lie a minute count of Brown’s press conference. I counted 12 in a minute when talking about debt.
65 - I think we can therefore safely assume that everything went well.
66 - This Smithson-Cohen prima dona grudge match is hugely - well, OK, mildly - entertaining.
61. didn’t one of the plotters’ backers get busted for being suspiciously ultra-short on the morning of 9/11?
or did i imagine that?
65 I agree, for now it looks like Cameron has lost a bit of his mojo.
71. I value your input as a neutral observer - thanks.
44. Mike. Thanks for that correction. Useful.
I think my second point stands though. Those who are betting Tory at the moment can be confident that even if the short-term movement is away from them, it’s likely to be a temporary shift. Those who are betting Labour are still depending on limited evidence that this temporary shift will happen at all. (Although I also think it’s likely.)
So according to Brown we have low public debt in this country.
He states that the latest Tory proposals are unfunded, and this according to Brown is on top of another 12 billion of unfunded policies? Shouldn’t this low debt that Brown talks of mean that the Tories will have no problem funding their plans?
Right, so with this historically low debt, he and Darling don’t need to worry about borrowing more to fund their own policies over the coming year because that would be the fiscally responsible thing to do? And this increased borrowing means that the government policies are funded?
Brown’s arguments are beginning to sound even more incoherent and bizarre now. He is going back to the same old script when it comes to any Tory economic policies while ripping up his own golden rules and dumping Prudence.
Fraser Nelson warns that The Gordfather’s hatred sets him up for a fall
““Never hate your enemy – it clouds your judgement”. This advice from Michael Corleone is very relevant to Gordon Brown, who makes his worst mistakes when he thinks he’d destabilising Tories. He loved how scared they were about talk of an October election last year, but didn’t realise how stupid he’d look when he didn’t call one. The speculation rebounded on him.
Same, I suspect, with his tax cut. Still no news today, but people are expecting £15 billion. This figure is actually a guesstimate from Robert Chote of the IFS, who told the FT last week that he wouldn’t be surprised if Brown were to cut taxes by the tune of 1% of GDP. In no time, this figure had been distilled down to £500 for every family and expectations were whetted. The Treasury should have shot this down instantly, but I suspect Brown was thinking too hard about how it would go down in Norman Shaw South (the Cameroons’ nest).
Whatever Darling pulls out of his Santa’s sack next week, I imagine it will fall very short of a £15bn tax cut. If so, Brown will look like a plonker – as he did over the 2p tax con, the 10p tax con, the bottled elections and all the other times he’s set himself up for a fall in his enthusiasm to screw the Tories. You see, the Gordfather just can’t help himself. His run of good luck has to end sometime. The higher expectations are for his pre-Budget report, the more likely it will be to rebound on him.”
31. The relevant death rate statistics are that each year those between 65-80 have a 3% mortality rate. Those between 18-40 have a 0.3% mortality rate. (real back of the envelope stuff). Add in the relative percentages voting for the different parties and the sample sizes etc, I think this would reduce the Tory vote by a fraction of 1%. One wonders if there is also not a natural rise in small “c” conservatism as people grow older that might not offset this. I assume that the former effect is already controlled for - the statistics is quite easy and the data widely available.
60 - I agree and I also see no problem with describing this Government as small-f fascists.
Cameron was better this morning than yesterday, he’d obviously been told to tone it down a bit. Cameron doesn’t like being pressed though, he certainly wobbles.
A tax cut and spending binge will put even more pressure on the £ - at what point will the plunge in the £ become a political issue ? The sooner politicians are reined in the better for the long term wellbeing of the UK - i fear GB is about to do even more lasting damge to the UK
75. Surely there is a massive macro point however that every year Labour lose dyed in the wool ex-manual labour union types who remember the 70’s and 80’s and replace them with non-job civil servants and feckless benefit mongs as their support.
Can the latter be deemed to be so loyal ? (maybe) Relied upon to become activists (maybe not) and relied upon to actually vote ? (maybe not).
72 Who’s neutral round here? Cam has lost a bit of his edge, it’s obvious. If you think Cameron (and the Tories) has been at his (their) best for the last few weeks you’ll get laughed off the site.
67 The Lie-O-Meter went off the scale during Browns shameful speech at the Mansion House last night. I’m amazed anyone in the audience bothered applauding at the end. A slow, discourteous hand clap would have been more appropriate.
78. I think the exchange rate is off the radar screen for the overwhelming majority of voters, in a floating rate system. There would have to be really massive moves a la Iceland for that to change.
80 Jonathan - Cameron was very good on the Today programme this morning. (And this time, the questioning was fair but tough - he was actually allowed to answer some of the questions.)
Watching the Brown press conference/meet. Brown keeps lying and repeating his lies with aplomb.
The press corps questions are not very probing, with no or v. little follow up. This whole thing is just another forum for a Brownian diatribe.
74 - Christina D - it’s easy, really. Just announce a tax rise, then cancel it and call the cancellation a tax cut. That’s what happened with the 10p fiasco and will now happen with VED and the fuel supplement.
84. Well after all the press will be hoping to be given a few stories by the No.10 spinners over the coming days, which will save them the effort of researching any. So why rock the boat?
85 … and re-announce proposals made several times before. Oh, and claim you’re reducing a tax and neglect to point out that the Treasury estimate is that the take will actually increase.
82 - would parity with the EUR be politically sensitive - EUR 1.1 is a real possibility sometime next year - some truly awful borrowing numbers could drive the £ even lower - with a floating currency the market price may overshoot and speculators will drive it down even more when the damage being inflicted on the UK economy becomes apparent
83. I thought Cameron was good this morning too FWIW. More evidence that they should concentrate on getting him in the media and bin that dolt Osborne.
Off topic, did anyone listen to Talk Sport last night at about 12.30am?
Labour MP, Stephen Pound rang in and had a major ding-dong with a caller over sex offenders working in schools etc.
Pound was outraged at suggestions that former Labour Minister(s) had ‘cleared’ / ‘allowed’ sex offenders to work with children. IMO, Pound was very agressive and IMO crossed the line with his attacks on the caller. It certainly wasn’t how I expect an MP to act in a debate and was pretty shocking in my view.
However, the main point is that after I’ve googled the issue today, it seems that the caller may have several valid points and that Pound himself may have been incorrect in totally rejecting the suggestions… to the point of calling the caller ‘a prat’.
As I listened last night, I knew I recalled reading about several cases like this. So, I question why an MP isn’t informed on the issue - even in a very general awareness sense.
So anyway, as I’ve said, google news searches show that there have been several high profile cases reported in 2006 for example where people were ‘cleared’ to work with children who should not have been.
I post this because I feel that something is not right when a member of the public is verbally attacked by an MP on an issue that seems have significant credibility and factual basis.
Maybe Nick Palmer MP can offer his view on this?
90. Send the story to some of the MSM journos or one the top bloggers. Hopefully the listen again will be on so Pound can be shown up again for the idiot that he is.
88. Well for now the pound’s depreciation is pretty much unambiguously positive for the economy and that won’t change unless we get into a freefall scenario such as in Iceland etc. You’re barking up the wrong tree here, I think.
80.”72 Who’s neutral round here? Cam has lost a bit of his edge, it’s obvious.”
I am listening open mouthed to Gordon Brown’s press conference right now. This man has no shame, its beyond parody. I cannot believe that you are not genuinely worried that this man is leading your party, never mind in charge of the country right now.
89 benbobjim - Clearly Cameron is a hugely better media performer than Osborne. (Hardly surprising - he’s by a mile the best media performer of any politician active in UK politics.) That doesn’t make Osborne a ‘dolt’, however.
Yes I thought Cameron was good on the today programme.
Jonathan - I think the Tories will accept a short term dip in poll ratings for the sheer volume of lies Gordon Brown has produced recently. I cant quite believe he can bring himself to say somethings - he should be shame faced. Unfortunately for the tories people do seem to believe what he says unquestioningly. Most will not understand how currency values reflect confidence in an economy from those willing to risk their money.
I actually think this adds value to Labour betting as most on here can see the the approaching problems in the economy - but do the general public. When will they realise?
I still believe that in an election campaign Cameron will outperform brown, he is just more natural and will win people over. And the libdems do also do better in an election, when they get more coverage, but I am sceptical at the moment due to the polarised nature of the next election. A large number of people still hate the tories, and will vote to prevent them getting in.
91. Stephen Pound an idiot is hardly newsworthy, though, is it?
89 Well we can all agree that Cameron, even when he is not at his best, is head and shoulders over the rest of the Tories. Only little Willy Hague comes close and that’s partly because his interventions are limited and consequently relatively well focussed compared to the others. I used to rate Osborne on the radio, but his performance as shadow chancellor during a key economic crisis has been below par.
Compared to Labour 1997, where Blair was flanked by popular figures like Dewar and Molam and independent figures like Cook and Brown, the Tories look like a one man band.
80. I agree Jonathan, Cameron seems particularly edgy lately, and he has an unfortunate tendency to blush in the most inapropiate places.
The main story of the Tory Party however is their lack or perceived lack of coherent policy’s, for the current situation. Part of the problem is that although the Conservatives have an ideaology they are frightened of refering to it and are tending to
abandon it’s core philosophy for the sake of tacktical advantage.
They will not advance if they rely on he weakness of it’s opponents to gain power.
75. the current retiring generation (becoming more likely to vote?) had the prime of their working/family lives in the ’70s and ’80s which was quite a politically divisive time, so it will be interesting to see if they do indeed get more conservative as previous generations appear to have done with age
85.&87. I remember that wonderful ability that Blair had, he could make it sound like he was agreeing with more than one point of view, but without actually saying anything you could then use against him at a later date.
Brown on the other hand, makes blatantly outrageous claims all over the place. One of these days he is going to really trip himself up and leave the Lobby with no choice but to call him on it.
92. Runnymede is right - BUT the question is whether it spills over into the gilts market at some point.
I had a little discussion last night with economist about Ricardian equivalence and debt and so on. We agreed that the overall debt level isnt worth getting worked up about. (Dont bother telling me about unfunded pension liabilities or PFI.) the deficit isnt likely to raise rates by itself.
But, we did agree that the government (and any prospective Tory government) must be careful to show that in the medium term they will control monetary and fiscal policy to control inflation and spending. The present government doesnt exactly do that at the moment (one of the reasons why sterling is falling and gilts are slightly restive) but nor do the Tories to some extent. This is why medium term forecasts of government policy are important and an area where Gordon Brown has lost his credibility with me.
97 Jonathan - The Tories may be a ‘one-man band’ in your terms - but, applying the same criteria, that makes Labour as it is now a zero-man band. The names from the past that you mention make that starkly clear.
100. They won’t. They can’t be bothered.
98. tactical, not tacktical, sorry.
41/47 Outside the big City firms, central and local government salaries for lawyers are actually pretty competitive with the private sector - and can be very good indeed if you’re employed by a body like HMRC.
Amongst solicitors who act for criminal defendants, about 90% of income comes from legal aid, which pays appallingly (apart from a few firms who have loads of white collar criminals among their clients) - so uncompetitive salaries probably aren’t the reason for CPS incompetence.
103. Ah, but once Brown is on the ropes they will and it will make him even unhappier. And once he is nailed as a liar, that’s all that anyone will remember.
102 One of my favorite, enduring what ifs is what would have happened if Cook had lived. I know he is not popular with some Tories, but he had a good brain. He surely would have challenged Brown. What would Labour’s position be if it was led by an opponent of the Iraq war?
Anyway, it is a real shame that the likes of Molam, Cook and Dewar dies so young. I guess fighting in opposition really took it out of them.
As for zero, I think most people know who the PM is, plus maybe one or two others in the cabinet. As for the shadows, I follow politics and I find it hard to name some of them.
92 it is debatable whether the fall is good for the economy - for some clearly it is but overall a weak currency is a reflection of a weakened position in the world economy. Also a lot of export servives ( major part of our exports )are not made more competitive by the lower pound and prices are not put up as a result - it just results in lower export earnings in foreign currency equivalents . Some low value added exporters can use price to gain market share but this is a lower part of the overall economy now . All imports become more expensive including oil and flat screen tvs or whatever else the man in the street likes to buy. I agree it is not a political issue at the moment - I am just wondering when it will be so . Politicians are looking to make short term tactical gains - so if the currency is not currently a problem they will push forward with tax cuts now - and then try and deflect the later consequences
101. This is a key area of interest Ken. It’s worth noting that UK 10-year gilt yields are only a few basis points lower than at the start of October - even though short rates have dropped 200 basis points in the interim. And 20-year yields are 15-20 basis points higher.
This may suggest some trepidation about the public finances is already been reflected in prices at the longer-end of the yield curve. My perspective is that the demand for risk-free assets is currently so high that the government has a lot of latitude in issuing new debt, and can do so mostly at the shorter end of the curve too, if it wants to. But that could change…
Morning all,
Mike, why do the polling companies persist with the ‘which political team do you trust the most to deal with the current crises’ as only Brown/Darling are in power to deal with it, it is also about as irrelevant as the ‘inexperience’ tag, how do Cameron/Osborne gain the experience without being elected until they are.
Bearing in mind that Bliar was a failed lawyer before entering politics & Brown was a political activist/speaker before entering politics - neither of which are exactly economic qualifications.
99
so it will be interesting to see if they do indeed get more conservative as previous generations appear to have done with age
I haven’t!
107 Jonathan - Yes, I’ve often wondered whether Cook might have ended up as PM, if he had lived. As for Tories disliking him, personally I respected him greatly, even if I didn’t agree with his politics (other than on Iraq). And he was honest.
As for comparing the Shadow Cabinet with ministers, it’s not really a fair comparison. Ministers get far more publicity, they get to make policy announcements, etc. It’s hardly surprising that Shadow Cabinet members are much less visible.
Still, everyone knows who George Osborne is now!
110. Because that question tends to produce the result they want.
108. Services can gain if their earnings are foreign currency denominated - so fees in Dollars for fund management are worth more in Sterling and costs dont rise so profitability rises. The UK does have a problem of a high marginal propensity to import, so inflation will be slightly higher as a result of a weaker Pound, but I dont see it as that big a deal - although if there is a market to watch, it is gilts. See 109.
111 - what’s the old saying….think it goes along the lines of:
“If a man is a conservative before he is 20, he has no heart. If he’s not a conservative by the time he’s 40, he has no brain.”
Something like that, anyway….
114. It’s been quite funny to read the posts on here over recent weeks desperately trying to argue that depreciation doesn’t help the economy. They remind me a lot of the disinformation being put about before the UK’s ERM exit in 1992. The odd thing is they are mostly coming from Tories, whereas back then they came from the left - including characters like Chris Huhne…
113. Yeah, which is more to the point as Brown had no economic qualifications whatsoever before taking the chancellor’s job or even when he was still shadow chancellor - I know he has a great love for history & the irony is that he will be judged very, very badly as the worst PM/Chancellor ever by the very subject that he likes so much – that really is poetic justice to a tee in his case.
102 (and others) - Jonathan makes a fair point and its worth heeding. Cameron hasn’t been on top of his game in recvent weeks, nor have the Tories been on top of theirs. They are too reliant on their one star performer and need broaden and deepen their media profile and the public element of their policy platform. Frankly, they look a little stunned by events at the moment, and for the first time their caution in not unveiling prematurely their manifesto has become a potentially serious weakness. However, I expect Cameron will hold firm - he knows that the fundamentals are moving in his direction, and when the storm is over the Tories will still be well placed for Government at the next election.
I forgot to mention that one of Cameron’s failures today was to answer Sian’s question regarding whether the Tories would stick to their pledge to honour Labour’s spending committments. It was an odd question, framed really aggressively as if it would be an act of great betrayal if he fails to do so. But Cameron flailed a little over the answer. He does seem to have lost some of his sureness of touch.
107: ‘What would Labour’s position be if it was led by an opponent of the Iraq war?’
The real unsolved mystery about Cook is whether he’d have been quite so opposed to the Iraq war if he hadn’t been demoted from Foreign Secretary before it all started. When he was FS, I remember him forever banging on about Saddam Hussein almost as if he were on a one-man crusade against the despot. Was this part of a pre-war softening up process of public opinion I wonder. Of course, we’ll never know and Cook’s sainthood amongst the ranks of Labour peacenicks is assured.
re 65 Gabble thanks for that. I now know that it was a well-measured and clearly thoought through presentation, so I don’t need to watch it.
119. Wasn’t Cook a big fan of the illegal attacks on Serbia as well?
115. Yeah due to being bled dry to the pips squeak out of you between the 20 - 40 ages.
119. When examining RC’s peace loving credentials don’t forget the little ginger satyr did drink the blood of many Serbian children.
107 Jonathan, Dewar wasn’t much rated at the time, Mo Mowlam made plenty of mistakes but was popular with the Party as she was seen as having been undercut by Blair, Mandy and Campbell. Robin Cook was indeed a talented politician and especially good at quickly grasping detail of issues and finding the weak points, never more so than over Iraq. He couldn’t have been leader because his personal life, manner and I’m sad to say physical attractiveness ruled him out.
Cameron’s shadow cabinet does have more talent IMHO than the Cabinet contains and he needs to deploy his Robin Cook - Chris Grayling - more. Osborne is a weak link due to the damage inflicted over Deripaska, and the media are out to get him still supported by Mandelson, but I think he has also suffered by too little personal support from other senior Tories (he has perhaps not cultivated the friendships he should have). However handing Labour Osborne’s scalp is more damaging than keeping him.
Is there a market open on the date when Brown screws everything up for himself again?
re 91 what do you mean send it to one of the top bloggers?
He already has done!
121: ‘Wasn’t Cook a big fan of the illegal attacks on Serbia as well?’
I think so. But of course it was Bill Clinton who was involved there, so that made things very easy for Labourites. In fact, if Clinton had instigated the war in Iraq I think Labour opposition would have been practically zero.
Apart from the social and psychological aspects of polling statistics, a master of which, Mike, you clearly are, there are also purely statistical considerations. For instance, for a random sample of number N, the standard deviation (spread) is proportional to its inverse square root. If we suppose that the difficulty in collecting a sample is proportional to N, then a little manipulation shows that this “difficulty” is proportional to the inverse square of the spread. So (for this simple model) if you want to halve the spread you must quadruple the number polled. For instance, if you want this improvement on a sample of one thousand you must poll four thousand.
115
So what if your always a conservative or vice versa?
of course it depends on what you mean by conservative? I’m a very conservative person, in my personal life. Bog standard really, happily married, (nearly 40 years) 2 children etc. Never committed a single offence, (3 points on my licence) always worked, never taken a state benefit.
I’m also a republican, athiest, I believe as a non-believer we have a duty to behave better than religious people, so far thats not been a problem.
Politically even though I’m pretty exasperated with Labour (after 3 terms you’d expect anyone to be) can’t say I see anything positive about the Tories, still a crusty ‘ol lefty like me wouldn’t.
If as you’d expect Cameron does win, (although still think no overall maj. most likely) I’ll enjoy being the left’s seant.
seant now there’s a fine example of Conservatism in action, a family values man to the core!!
127. Yes perhaps. As argued before, the difference between Clinton administration and the preceding and following Republican ones in terms of their appetite for overseas adventures/imperialist expansion was pretty minimal.
The sudden opposition to this on the left comes mostly from their personal dislike of George W Bush. And to a lesser extent from the choice of US victims - illegal wars against European oppressors of a muslim minority are so much easier to swallow than against paragons of Arabic virtue like Saddam Hussein
94. I’m afraid I consider Osborne hopelessly, possibly ruinously, overrated. I have lost count of the times on here that I read “he’s a great strategist” and “can choose his own job”.
Someone should tell him to strategise in a quiet room somewhere and “choose” a job as party chairman. He is an electoral liability to the public at large, despite what the Tory faithful on here might think. For me, the spectacle of Sean T getting ripped into when he suggests that Ozzie should be moved simply proves my point – Sean is a Tory supporter whose critical capacities are in fine fettle. Some others on here need to start listening to him.
129 It will be interesting to see what happens to pb.com in the wake of a Tory victory. SeanT’s paeans of praise to the govt will be particularly sickening.
65. Ludicrous post even by your standards. Whatever you thought of Cameron and Osborne Chris Grayling was excellent. A clear grasp of the detail of the policy and explained it in terms even I could understand. Grayling really is a top performer and the Tories should ensure we see and hear more of him in the studios.
130 Yes, I remember the horrific cost to our Army when they marched into Belgrade. And the ongoing Serbian insurrection. Exactly the same as what happened in Iraq.
132 - pb.com would move sharply leftwards in the event of a Conservative victory. Opposition is always more fun than support.
57. Glenrothes postal voting rocketed by around 7000 at recent by-election.
135 It’s certainly easier and fits better with the British Psyche.
136 MalcomG - Did the SNP fail to mobilise postal votes as well as Labour?
from conservativehome:
“Populus is the same pollster that claimed we were only 3% ahead in March, lower than all the other polling organisations that month. Then we won the local elections by a landslide and gained the London mayoralty.”
a one off rogue poll?
134. I see so it was OK because it mostly involved low-risk bombing, including of civilians? The principle is irrelevant, only the practicalities matter? Now I understand.
137 - That has got me pondering: who or what is the British Cupid?
Off topic and reviving our debate on the Spoty, can someone explain to me why the Observer has dubbed the battle between Adlington and Hamilton the “Battle of the Sexes”
I am an Observer reader and I was of the impression it was a competition to see who was the better sports champion rather than whether we thought a girl or a bloke should win.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2008/nov/09/rebecca-adlington-lewis-hamilton
140 - In fairness to pollsters, they are meant to measure what would happen at a General Election, not at a local election. The Tories did well in terms of topping the poll at several local and Euro elections 1997-2004 without ever looking in any serious danger of being required to form a government. The last set of locals were of course very good for them, but it isn’t a like for like comparison.
132. A honeymoon. Same as ever. I had high hopes when Gordon talked about neo-classical endogenous growth theory and came to power. I really thought he might tackle issues of productivity and education, shaking up the entrenched interest groups like the NUT and the DES. Instead what we got was a splurge, no attempt at reform and idiotic diktats from the centre. Regular fiascos like Individual Learning Accounts. They didnt reverse the idiocy that was Major’s rail privatization. He plunged headlong into idiotic PFI deals. I loathe him with a passion that is only understandable in light of the high hopes I once had.
143, not really my type of market, but I don’t see why gender should be a factor. Adlington’s unfortunately not got as strong a chance as she might’ve had Hoy not selfishly won so many golds.
Ugh, first GP of 2009 is at the end of March. Still, might give me time to try and work out some cunning longterm bets.
145 - It was POST-neoclassical endogenous growth theory, I think you will find. Maybe that was your mistake? Had you known it was POST-neoclassical endogenous growth theory, you would have been far less enthusiastic.
141 Very good.
143 - I like the fact Adlington is actively campaigning for it. Dame Kelly did the same four years ago and won tidily, and I think Adlington is a good bet as a result (though Hoy does complicate it).
147. Sorry dropped the “post” there. No, I was enthusiastic about the required structural reforms that should be put in place to make TFP increase. (Not to be confused with neoclassical growth theory).
145,150. Ken - are you prepared to tell us where you work? You seem very well informed.
143,149 SPOTY: Sunday 14 December
I think many have rose tinted classes on here Robin Cook was seen as a joke by many after his affair in 97, and was badly damaged and seen as a liability as foreign secretary during 97 to 01.
Talk about re-wrting history.
149. She does come across as very Girl Next Door, with her meagre salary and love of shoes and glamour. She’s kinda cheeky too, and I like her enthusiasm for life. I guess if we are voting on the personality bit she might deserve the award. Of course, I’ve made no secret of my support for Lewis but I think really whoever wins this year the main thing to be proud of is the wealth of great candidates we have in UK sport. Anyone one of them would have won last year when we got the non-personality of Zara Phillips. Ug.
Osborne looked diminished today. Literally side-lined by Cameron and Grayling trying to outshine him (not difficult).
The Mirror journo asked Cameron whether Osborne had informed him that he was going to take the chief fundraiser onto Deripaska’s yacht. Cameron panicked, looked flustered, blurted out something about Mandelson and attempted to move on quickly, despite the journo’s protestations.
It all looked pretty amateurish.
154 - We got Joe Calzaghe last year. Phillips was 2006.
155. Ozzie is a joke. He’s teh weak line.
Cue: “he’s a master strategist” and “he can choose him own job”.
OK right-ho.
156. Whoops, yeah sorry. Calzaghe was a worth winner – a superb fighter and we wish him well in retirement.
Osborne looks out of his depth but who do you replace him with? Redwood is a non-stater, Clarke would be problematic (if he wanted it anyway) Willets might still be affected by the grammar school business and I’m not sure he’d want to bring Davis back. I can’t think of any other credible people to do it.
Personally I’d go with Willets - the guy sounds like he knows his stuff, which is all that matters at the moment - but it might be a problem with the grassroots.
158 - Phillips partly won because Darren Clarke asked people not to vote for him. He probably deserved it on the strength of character issue (not that golf interests me in the least).
Home sales at 30yr low
Retail sales fall in October
FTSE down 2%
Gordo gets 35%
Weird.
153.Test
161 - Not that weird. A lot of people buy that it is a world problem and trust Brown more to deal with it on his “serious man for serious times” argument.
It is really quite simple and it is for the Tories and Lib Dems to challenge those two ideas.
153.”Talk about re-writing history.”
I must admit that I thought that too.
159 Hague or Davis the conservatives need some people who dragged themselves up from poor or middle class backgrounds aspirational types, to counter balance the born to rule aristocracy image of Osborne especially less so Cameron.
Its difficult to relate to someone who has never had any concerns on how to afford it.
161 “A lot of people buy that it is a world problem and trust Brown more to deal with it ”
Thats the bit I find weird.
165.”Its difficult to relate to someone who has never had any concerns on how to afford it.”
Well you will be struggling to relate to many senior politicians of all parties.
165. What like Brown, that doughty survivor of an impoverised upbringing?
159 The Economic portfolio needs a top communicator capable of gravitas. In the absence of Cameron the best communicators in the Tory party are Hague and Clarke. David Davis is a touch unstable. Chris Grayling may have potential from his journalist/BBC roots, but looks very grey(no pun intended) IMO. He would make a good employment spokesman. Perhaps they should offer Vince Cable the job if Osborne does not shape up!
When do the unemployment & infalation figures come out? Can’t be long.
159. Ken Clarke. “would be problematic”
Why? Because he would irritate the right-wing Europhobe base? What better way to win a general election than pitch for the centre ground? That’s exactly what Blair did – conspiculously move to the centre, irritate the base, but realise that the base has nowhere else to go and votes for you anyway.
This strategy still seems to be beyond some Tories who prefer the likes of Eric Pickles to the excellent and bright Heseltine because Pickles gets rounds of applause from the blue rinse brigade even though he is bereft of ideas and thinks the way to solve local government is to support status-quo structures and simply beg Whitehall for more powers.
Dead easy: Clarke as shadow chancellor, Hezza as DCLG shadow, Davies back as shadow home secretary. So simple, you’ll probably miss it.
dez - Clarke and Willets don’t strike me as posh. Clarke has credibility and I think Willets would strike people as serious. What with the 2-brain nickname, the Tories might be able to deal with the shallow salesman tag. Hague has had soething of rejeuvenation - but just remember where he was in 2001 - I’m not quite sure he is what people are looking for.
171. How about Churchill as defence minister ?
166 - Well, it is a world problem (though serious query as to whether it is somewhat worse here) and Brown presided over a long unbroken period of growth (though query how responsible he was for it).
You probably also underestimate the Osborne effect - he is not very credible at all and the oligarch fiasco was damaging. Are he and Cameron the men with a plan? Not on today’s evidence or more generally. Cable is much more credible but in fairness only likely to be Chancellor in a hung Parliament.
So it isn’t weird and the Tories and Lib Dems have a job to do.
Problem with Clarke thought is that it gives permission for Labour to say stuff like “same old Tories” “15%” etc… Huge risk, but maybe worth it. I’d certainly feel happier if the Tories had him on board.
171. Davies - do you mean David Davis? Or Quentin Davies?
Or even David Davies?
Coffee house is one of the few places where Gordon’s porkies get any coverage - again this morning.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2590836/always-honest.thtml
I’m always honest with the British public” said Gordon Brown at his monthly press conference. Then, this: “There can be no argument about where we’ve been over the last few years on debt. Debt was reduced from 44% of national income to 37% at the latest count. And that is a fact.” No, Prime Minister, that is a lie. The latest count was in September, when the ONS said net national debt is 43.4% of GDP
176. Sorry yes – David Davis.
re 171 isn’t Heseltine pushing 80?
168.”165. What like Brown, that doughty survivor of an impoverised upbringing?”
That one always makes me laugh. And which senior politician struggled away as a student at an elite University while dating royalty?
178 Should be Dickie Davis surely.
173 - Winston or Randolph? And what’s the Marquess of Salisbury doing nowadays? We need his gravitas at the Department for Culture Media and Sport - Minister of Fun.
177. Where does Brown get the 37% figure from? When was this ‘latest count’? 2003?
174. “You probably also underestimate the Osborne effect ”
Most Tories on here do – those that do not such as Martin Coxall and Sean T get shot down for saying so.
169, 171, 175 I think the only serious contender would be Hague. He would come over better than Osborne in the present circumstances, and he’s popular and trusted. However, there are indications he wouldn’t want the job. Redwood and Clarke* are non-starters, for party political reasons, and in any case would be seen as too much a return to the past. Davis is too much of a maverick, and in any case is not as quick on his feet as would be necessary for this role at this time.
The bottom line IMHO is: Osborne will very probably remain as Shadow Chancellor, because any attempt to move him would look like weakness, and in any case he is very close to Cameron. If there were a change, the choice would be Hague, if he were willing to take the job.
* benbobjim: There is not a snowflake’s chance in hell of Cameron appointing Clarke as Shadow Chancellor. Despite his obvious talents, he is an INCREDIBLY unpopular figure amongst a substantial proportion of the party (not me, I hasten to add). It would just be too divisive.
174: ‘Cable is much more credible but in fairness only likely to be Chancellor in a hung Parliament.’
I doubt either of the main parties would have a Lib Dem as Chancellor, hung parliament or not - a price neither of them would see as worth paying. (And I mean this seriously, not as a sacastic dig at the Lib Dems.)
I wondered during the us election coverage what 538 was. Now I know
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/11/10/business/silver.php
Interesting article about the guy behind http://www.538.com and how he does his analysis.
171 Clarke would be problematic because he spent an awful lot of his ministerial career systematically offending Conservative supporters. Teachers, police, and doctors for a start.
A lesson not learned by this government which, pace this week’s Brown bounce, still trails the Conservatives’ poll ratings by a fair margin.
The base may have nowhere else to go but it doesn’t have to go anywhere: it can stay at home on polling day.
The site is http://www.fivethirtyeight.com not 538.com
188 Clarke disagrees with the party leadership on issues like adopting the Euro, so he would be a non-starter as Shadow Chancellor.
185. “benbobjim: There is not a snowflake’s chance in hell of Cameron appointing Clarke as Shadow Chancellor. Despite his obvious talents, he is an INCREDIBLY unpopular figure amongst a substantial proportion of the party (not me, I hasten to add). It would just be too divisive.”
Sometimes pissing off your base is a great way to win elections. And the idea that Ozzie stays as Shad Chan because he is close to Cameron saddens me. The Tories should be creating a team that is a winner with the public rather than the base/Notting Hill Set.
190. David Davis disagrees with Tory policy on capital punishment but he was Shadow Home Secretary for years.
186 - I don’t know. Your point is not unreasonable but: (i) serious economic times and there’s sense in (high-mindedly) being bipartisan and (cynically) sharing the blame in economic terms; and (ii) the pressure would be on as Cable is so widely seen (rightly or wrongly) as eminently better qualified than any major rival for the role.
I accept that, in general terms, the dominant coalition partner would rather sacrifice the Foreign Office.
167 Christinad, I would agree with that.
However there has been a lot who have had a struggle in childhood.
Alan Johnson, David Blunkett,David Davis to name three, I am sure many can at least remember how difficult it can be.
172 Frank true regarding Clarke he had the blokish image, Willets is not used enough in my opinion a good thinker out of the box.
Hague especailly in Yorkshire is seen as a man who went to early but is respected deserves another chance as a top government minister in the next conservative administration.
McNulty seems to be on telly a lot recently. Should we lump on for next Labour leader?
184.Err, I have long been a supporter of Osborne, and certainly rate him as a political strategist. But, for a long time on this site I was one of only a few that thought that. So, can we give this whinge about minority views being bashed a rest. Instead lets debate the issue, and remember that if someone puts up a valid argument its not the same as simple shooting down other posters.
I doubt that either Martin Coxall or Sean T are that bothered about others here not agreeing with them, they are hardly the two biggest shrinking violets on this site,and are well able to fight their corner in any debate.
192 - I think that’s a bit different as Clarke would effectively be saying that his preferred monetary policy is unavailable. That’s pretty central to the Treasury brief in a way capital punishment isn’t key to an anti-crime strategy (it may be a preference for some but it is applicable only in a tiny minority of cases - just not the keystone).
However, I think Clarke might well be prepared to say the Euro is simply off the UK policy agenda for this generation now.
Osborne on BBC2 now, lets see how he does.
183. Brown had the ONS draw up a special set of figures that exclude things like Northern Rock. Draw your own conclusion as to why we need two sets of figures.
198 - I predict Tories here will say he did well, others will say he did badly, and the truth will lie somewhere in between. Just a hunch.
192. Not a meaningful comparison. Capital punshment is larely a conscience issue whereas Euro could again become more of a party issue.
191 Quite so. Mandelson is possibly the most unpopular man in the Labour party, but his appointment has undoubtedly benefited Brown - perhpas because he has kept the second most unpopular man - Balls - off the airwaves for some time :lol:.
Come on guys the Tories had a 13% leasd only on Sunday. this isnt worth worrying about.
People who want to believe the spin about everything being ok v. shortly are buoyed by interest rate cuts and talk of tax cuts. The government will be pleased because it means these people will still spend towards Christmas and spending is what has dried up.
In fact, these people should be very alarmed indeed that this policy is being made, with the currency already devalued 25% in the last few months. Addd to this the fact that most people are likley to save any tax cut or drop in morrtage payments (no-one wants to be the one caught out when unemployment comes, i sure as hell don’t and i’m acting accordingly), and you can see that many people don’t have so much to be optimistic about.
I wish it wasnt so , but all indications are that this recession will be every bit as bad as the early 1990’s, and quite likely an awful lot worse.
Large numbers of well paying professional jobs are disappearing into thin air. These people support other service industries, which our economy now largely comprises. Added to that, the manufacturing / industrial sector is also getting a hammering at the same time, and pay freezes or even cuts are becoming the norm.
In what way is this going to make people hopeful for their own prospects? They either buy the spin in the hope it won’t be so(and to an extent we all wish bad things wouldnt happen , or turn a blind eye to the possibilities that bad things are happening) ; or sadly, and i reluctantly say this, they are too ignorant to know better about the dreadfully exposed state Gordon Brown has got us in.
#183 Brown nets off Northern Rock on the basis that it’s temporary, and then proceeds to lecture everyone else on balance sheet transparency.
Have a look at the ONS site. The pink triangles in the graph excluding NRK are presumeably at Brown’s insistence.
196. I’m not saying their feelings have been hurt – of course not – I’m just saying that these lone Tory voices are correct. And Christina, Ozzie can be a great strategist and NOT be shadow chancellor!
There’s no chance of the UK going into the Euro under a Tory government, Clarke would know that. It’s a question of whether he’d be prepared to come back, or if cammy would want him - not being a Notting Hill resident of course. The one thing the Tories currently lack is a sense of credibility - Clarke could deal with that in a shot.
I’ve no agenda in helping the Tories, but Cameron seems too fixated with his metropolitan clique.
203. Incidently the interest rate cuts will not be in time for Xmas - the 0.5% comes off my December payment and the 1.5% comes of January (I have a tracker thankfully). So no realy benefit until after Xmas - unless everyone puts it on plastic again.
203. What I still don’t grasp is why a falling pound is necessarily bad for the economy. It is very good for the economy if you are an exporter and it is also good for firms that work abroad and get paid in dollars/euros, which is many thousands of them.
206. Superb and accurate post.
200: ‘I predict Tories here will say he did well, others will say he did badly…’
Ozzy seemed all right. Looked a touch peeved when Brillo brought up some ConHome voodoo poll but who wouldn’t be.
207. Erm if you know you are going to get it a month later and then again probably for many months in the future I guess for most people that’s enough to let it ride over Yuletide.
203 But economic difficulties do not automatically increase support for opposition parties - people become more cautious about change and there is the “holding on to nurse” syndrome - 1992 being the obvious example. The evidence is that at the moment people are not disposed to attach much blame to Brown personally. And those who can remember the recessions of the 1980s and 1990s - and most of the electorate is old enough to remember them - will not recall the compassionate approach that the Tories took to the unemployed and dispossessed - on the contrary - that nice Mr Tebbit told them to f*ck off and get on their bikes.
Is Osborne good at strategy or tactics?
Strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal.
Tactics are small minty sweets.
212: ‘…that nice Mr Tebbit told them to f*ck off and get on their bikes.’
‘I grew up in the ’30s with an unemployed father. He didn’t riot. He got on his bike and looked for work, and he kept looking till he found it.’
204. Perhaps Brown will argue that all the extra borrowing that will be associated with the recession is temporary as well, and should also be excluded.
#203 I had my letter too - the 0.5% cut applies from Nov 2nd.
Bank very kindly said I could keep my repayment levels at the same level and hopefully that would help pay off the mortgage a little earlier, rather than go and waste it in Tescos.
I just think Cameron moving Osbourne now would be politically stupid. It would look like panick. And even the left-leaning on this site must surely agree that giving (what would look like) a victory to the odious Mandelson would be a horrific mistake… it would simply encourage a longer ‘third life’ for that particular member of the un-dead.
If Osbourne should be moved (and I’m not convinced he should) then waiting until the New Year would be more sensible, in my view.
The Tories are still in the 40s in the polls, voters who think the worst of the economic problems are over (as the Populus poll seems to indicate) will get a nasty shock over the next few months, and I simply can’t see that benefitting Labour.
Incidentally, I have noticed a sharp increase in activity of left-leanig posters on this site over the past couple of months. Maybe I should start complaing that it’s becoming a left-wing zone where Tories are hounded out - does that sort of arguement ring any bells with Labour supporters out there?
217. The level of left wing activity on this site is directly related to the fluctuations in the polls.
Thin Ozzy did ok, but I still think he looks weak and on wobbly ground when really pushed on certain issues. He just doesn’t have that way of battling back the interviewer on to the message he wants to talks about in the way say Hague or Clark can. I think the ConHome poll question was a low blow from Neal, really completely irrelevant what a load of blue rinsers think after some bad headlines.
What made Ozzy / Cons look better was the idiot McNulty on after him. Ever time I see him he looks a clueless bully, and Neal had him perfectly setup with several questions, including the PM lying about debt as a % of GDP. I have no idea why the Labour party think that sending him on to the Daily Politics every week does them any favours at all.
217. Osborne spells his name like this.
203. 13 points not per cent.
219. I think McNulty is a reassuring figure for the Labour core vote. He exhibits so many of their basic characteristics.
102: Ken
Why are PFI and public sector pensions (estimated liability £1trn) not important?
A genuine question, I am a total layman, but it seems to me that they must matter on some level?
Amazed that Brown can blithely fund tax cts with more borrowing, yet almost in the same breath criticise the tories for some of their policies being “unfunded”. This is total garbage. The polling evidence that people seem to be falling for it is extremely worrying and depressing.
219, because almost no-one watches the Daily Politics, and it only makes news outside its immediate audience for two reasons:
1) something important is revealed (and everyone already knows McNumpty is a talentless arsehead)
2) the unweighted and worthless poll, which the BBC seems to like.
As an observation when the pressure is off Cameron is smooth, charismatic, charming, shows leadership;
BUT when the pressure is on he comes across as tetchy, irritable, incoherent- not someone who can take the pressure well. this contrast with Gordon who positively shines now under pressure.
I think in the last month or so I am beginning to see the signs of what a poor PM Cameron would make- reminds me of what happened at Ealing.
Where is our Obama?
216 - not sure you will pay any extra off by them keeping the level high - just pay more interest?
The problem the Tories have with there strategies at the moment are that the impact of Browns borrowings (and soon to be extra borrowing) verses the Tories talk of supporting business with VAT holidays, Tax incentives for employ unemployed etc, goes way above the average joe’s head.
Most people think government borrowing, so what, I borrow on my credit card, house etc, and I’m in shed loads of debt, but I phone up one of those IVA people and they sort it out. Where as the Tories ideas sound like helping business and not the little man at a time when all these people in shed loads of debt can’t afford to pay bills etc (often because of the large debt they have to service).
People on the whole are short-term-ist and will back more money in my pocket, even if it is the same person who took it all in the first place vs complicated incentives helping businesses to survive.
I think the Tories could be on to a loser with this at least in the short term (and short term could still stretch to next election).
224, not seen much of Cameron, but Brown does not shine under pressure. His glee is solely because things are turning his way slightly, the very opposite of pressure.
Who says education standards are dropping ??
http://www.order-order.com/2008/11/bbc-reefer-madness.html
I cannot believe that Brown has the front to say what he did today in his response to the Tories ideas at Brown’s knee-jerk moved press conference.
Brown obviously takes us for fools saying “the tory plans are uncosted”. WTF!!! Brown is proposing increased spending, grand projects mentioned a couple of weeks ago and now tax cuts on the never never!
He does not even know what the current level of debt is as he 37% contradicts the current ONS figure. Brown really is the worst PM ever to stain the office of Prime Minister.
To those Labour posters who go on about helping the poor and unemployed. Let me tell you I have been out of work for 6 months and recieved F*ck all extra money, no offers of help with training or any other assistence in getting me into work. Labour are full of sh*t on this subject. The Tory proposals at least give someone like me a chance by reducing the barriers to employment. I should have thought Labour would embrace and even “steal” this proposal as it builds on the new deal IMO?
217 It’s more interesting when the left/right views are more evenly matched - a few months ago most threads consisted largely of Tories who were certain that the next election was already as good as won and a 1997-style landslide was the bottom end of their expectations. Any attempt to put an alternative point of view was sneered at so comprehensively that most of us gave up trying. Nick Palmer stuck with it though - cool under fire!
I have been recently reading this website for the past couple of weeks. Thanks to Mike Smithson for providing such an excellent website.
I dabble a little on the political markets on Betfair and on their forum, much as it is here, there is an overwhelming bias in favour of the Conservatives. OK, there is a higher class of bias here. You people are a lot more reasoned in your bias and “appear” to look at both sides of the equation.
However, there seems to be an ostrich-like mentality, when it comes to even considering the possibility that Labour might, in fact, do very well at the next General Election.
I am not a Labour apologist by any means. I totally share the general consensus of opinion that Brown has screwed up the economy and is screwing it up further in order to save his slimey skin.
However, this is a site to discuss political betting and to do that objectively, one needs to look at the mentality of the average voter.
For months the media has been full of horror stories about the critical state of the economy and the impending recession. It is the economic equivalent to a major terrorist attack in the heart of London. The average voter is in a state of fear. At times like these, they look to their Government to pull them out of the mess and want to believe that they can, because the alternative is far too painful to consider.
They don’t want to listen to “wet behind the ears” Conservative politicians telling them that Brown is only making things worse… even if that actaully IS the case. Just as in the situation of a terrorist attack, they want to reassurance that their Government are taking all the necessary steps to avoid further disaster.
The average voter is not clued up enough to judge whether the tack that Brown is taking to deal with the crisis, is correct.
Just as with the Iraq war, when around 80% of the country was against us going to war, when it actually happened, opinion suddenly switched because it was a time of crisis, our boys were in danger and the patriotic thing to do was to back the Governement’s decision.
The average voter has had fear levels ratcheted up by the media and is looking for a saviour. Their view is that if we are all to be saved, there IS only one man who can do it, because Cameron has no power to do anything at the moment.
The average voter will look for signs that the measures Brown is taking will save us all from economic meltdown. The average voter isn’t worried that Brown is increasing borrowing to help us all out of this mess, because the average voter has done exactly the same thing and borrowed beyond their means for the past ten years, which has helped get the economy in the mess it is in, in the first place.
The average voter sees the results of Brown’s action to deal with the problem. He sees interest rates being slashed and sees a hefty reduction in his mortgage. He will see tax reductions. He sees petrol prices coming down. The average voter does not have hundreds of thousands of pounds invested, so he he is not concerned that saver’s returns are being slashed.
Getting back to the betting perspective, as this is a political betting site, the odds currently avaialble are completely screwed up by the ostrich-like mentality of highly intelligent people who know that Brown and Labour should be tossed out on their ear at the next election.
They underestimate the Labour spin machine which knows how to win a General Election, even when they have no right to do so. Some very intelligent people on here have been talking about a 2010 election as though it is the foregone conclusion that the odd of just over 1/2 suggest it is. Come on people, do you really think that Brown is going to hang on until the last possible moment? It is not gonna happen. Brown knows that things are going to be worse in 12 months time. He knows that if he waits another 12 months, his chickens will be coming home to roost. He knows that it will be portrayed as clinging on to power for as long as possbile and how that would play out with the average voter. I will be amazed if we do not have an election in the next 6 months.
I want a thumping Conservative majority at the next election as much as any of you guys, but it’s not going to happen. Brown can afford to be 5% behind in the polls and still cling on to power in a hung Parliament. Whenever that looks like a possibility, he will cut and run and go for it. Therefore, is it really heavy odds on that the Conservatives will win most seats and have a working majority at the next election.
The amswer to that question is, only in the minds of those who WANT it to happen.
Flame away!
224. “Where is our Obama?” Good question. If Labour can find him, they can win two more terms. This is centre-left country now, evidenced by the vast support for Obama over McCain here in polling.
Do you live in Ealing? Me too.
222. I think Tories need to stop worrying. When you are in an apparent crisis, the government inevitably hogs the headlines (because they’re the ones who get to DO things) and it’s hard for the opposition to seem credible. Once the financial situation seems to have stabilised, the recession will kick in - predicted to be worse in the UK than any other major economy by the IMF. Brown is finished.
Tories could still do with a new shadow chancellor, though!
229, Cameron should bring up the true ONS figures in PMQs. Brown’s deceit shouldn’t pass without comment.
I cannot help but think the deffered taxation that Brown wishes to
hobble Britain with stands interestingly against that old Slogan - “No taxation without representation” by this I mean a general election. It is obvious to me that Brown is doing everything he can to maximise the mess for partisan purposes he passes onto the next government. I therefore think Brown should take his case to the country immediatly.
224. Think your memory must be missing October last year Tyson.
I fear Penny4Them at 12.37 may have a point, although i don’t accept his thesis completely I do think we face an increasingly obvious pre-election build up by Labour.
A combination of ‘dash-for-growth’ tax and interest rate cuts hand in hand with a superhuman spin campaign masterminded by Campbell, and a behind the scenes knife-in-the-back campaign against George Osbourne all points in one direction, close the poll gap and go for an early GE before the economic whatsit really hits the fan.
March ‘09 if the poll gap stays below 10%.
222. PFI is tiny - 5-10% of GDP. The pensions are a contingent liability whose total value fluctuates depending on the assumptions used*. I expect the government to curb them to some extent - by hiking retirement age and so on. Pensions liabilities are a big future concern, but as a practical matter I find it easier to talk about debt to GDP on SNA accounts. It probably does affect gilt rates to some extent, but nowhere near the extent that some of the more rabid would like to believe.
*So longevity, career expected salary, discount rates, plus whatever else the government does to curb the liability. All OECD governments have pensions problems either from public sector liabilities or for the state pension scheme.
Interesting article from bloomberg.com
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206…&refer=home
204.”204. Perhaps Brown will argue that all the extra borrowing that will be associated with the recession is temporary as well, and should also be excluded.”
That would be funny if I didn’t think he was more than capable of doing just that!
217.”I just think Cameron moving Osborne now would be politically stupid.”
Agreed, the biggest clue is the fact that Labour are so desperately hoping that the Tories will do it.
219.”and Neal had him perfectly setup with several questions, including the PM lying about debt as a % of GDP.”
Paxman was trying to question what the true debt level was last night on Newsnight, and Fraser Nelson’s latest post on the Coffee House Blog asks the question about being Always honest?. Now with Neil bringing it up, the government might have a real problem selling this latest con.
Like the 10p tax con, its been a slow burner in the media, but there comes a point when Brown’s claims become so distance from reality that they have to be questioned.
244.”BUT when the pressure is on he comes across as tetchy, irritable, incoherent- not someone who can take the pressure well. this contrast with Gordon who positively shines now under pressure.”
Tyson that is simple not true, only a few weeks ago at the height of the Banking meltdown Brown’s performances in front of the camera were beyond embarrassing. Just look at Cameron’s track record from his first PMQ’s, and during tough situations like leadership contests. I think that you are misremembering the last 18 months.
Brown’s joke about another bank going under when that mobile phone went off during his speech sums it up.
226 Actually, the majority of people are pretty cautious about borrowing too heavily. The average mortgage, for example, is £117,000, supported by an income, on average, of £41,000, which is quite affordable.
It is a fairly small minority of people who run up vast debts on credit cards and then go bankrupt.
236. I’m not convinced about Tyson’s argument on pressure. Cameron vs Brown - it’s like a tennis match. Cammo is 2 sets up and coasting, then suddenly Gordon breaks at the start of the 3rd set and it’s game on again. Suddenly he seems sprightly and Cammo seems nervy, even the crowd are prepared to give Gordon a bit of help (not wanting an easy victory for his opponent). In the end it’s Cameron who’s got everything to lose and Brown who has everything to gain - he was finished not long ago.
Whether Cameron would handle the pressure less well in office is a different matter. What we know of both men, I would think the opposite.
238 - “I expect the government to curb them to some extent - by hiking retirement age and so on.”
The government has already curbed the build-up of public sector pension scheme liabilities by writing maximum employer contribution rates into the various schemes after the latest round of public sector pension reform.
231 Welcome, Penny4them!
Although this is primarily a betting Site, the overwhelming majority of posters do not bet, or not seriously anyway. New posters who are also punters are therefore particularly welcome. Those who suborinate their political preferences to their betting judgement are doubly welcome.
The Site is at its best when the betting markets are lively and most of the posts are actually betting related. The recent US elections were a bean feast, as you probably gathered. The betting element is quiet now and likely to remain so for some time. The non-punters, who visit largely to beat their breasts and use the Site as a free billboard for their favoured parties, have returned and there are few useful hints to be gathered. If the Site seems dull and off message for a bit as a result, be patient. It always invariably returns to its core theme. There are some astute punters here. You will learn who they are (and who they are not!) and unless you are an utterly hopeless judge, you should benefit financially in due course, as many others have.
Look forward to sharing views with you in due course.
233 Exactly Frank,
However if Cameron can`t move Osborne to shadow Foreign Secretary in the christmas recess, it doesn`t fill you full of promise in our potential new PM making hard decisions.
He should start with this easy one, as they will get a lot more difficult if he walks in to downing street.
232 - I don’t think it is that simple. As shown by the likes of Iain Dale, Alan Duncan, etc who has publically said they would vote for Obama (vs McCain). In fact Duncan said he would have voted against Bush in 2004 election as well.
Having just returned from a 3 week vacation in the swing states of Florida and North Carolina, for a European the McCain/Palin campaign was shocking bad, negative, redneck supporting. Interestingly and very telling was the fact that the latino vote that normally whole heartedly supports the Republicans in places like Florida went for Obama (even though they overwhelmingly supported Bush in 2000 and 2004). The Republican campaign was so off the mark and the McCain/Palin ticket so bad that even some of their biggest supporters turned.
As an aside, don’t buy the press coverage from US and UK about the ground swell of support for the election result. Obama’s win hasn’t gone down very well at all in large parts of the country. The right choice, the only choice in reality, but many many Americans are very angry. Unless Obama is very careful the issues of race could become more divisive, rather than less.
Cammeron as Tim Henman - like it!
231 Btw Penny4them, those astute punters I referred have for some time been trumpeting the value in a Hung Parliament on Betfair’s GE Seats Markets. The value remains, if you want to check it out.
237.”A combination of ‘dash-for-growth’ tax and interest rate cuts hand in hand with a superhuman spin campaign masterminded by Campbell, and a behind the scenes knife-in-the-back campaign against George Osbourne all points in one direction, close the poll gap and go for an early GE before the economic whatsit really hits the fan.”
I think that you might be right Marcus, and don’t forget that at some point Brown and Darling will have to raise taxes again to pay for these short term political tactics.
228: please tell me that is a spoof!
251. Afraid not - Iain Dale covering it too..
250.Apparently not.
241 - That just doesn’t hold true when you look at the size of personal debt in this country. It used to be true, that a small number of people were over-indebted, but that isn’t the case now. Furthermore, debt is far more acceptable, going bankrupt used to make you a social outcast, etc. Even those who don’t have debt it is acceptable as a means to an end. A couple of generations ago, debt and loans were evil words.
I read a report a while back, which I have lost the link to, setting out the scale of debt in this country. It’s basic findings were that the number of people who had debt (excluding mortgages) were greater than ever, and of those people the size of that debt was far bigger as a % of their income than any time since records began. It truly scary the level to which people had been allowed ,and got themselves, indebted.
253. Amongst the young, I would say debt hasn’t just become acceptable, it’s become fashionable.
Who presided over this irresponsible cultural shift?
Extremely busy due to bringing up children, drinking too much, trying to write thrillers, and preparing to fly around the world for LOADSAMONEY, however I have noted the yukky polls for Cammo and I have two things to say:
1. Move Osborne (did I even need to say it?)
2. As with the poster at 231, I think Labour are now a very good bet for the GE, either to win the largest number of seats, or even, incredibly, an overall majority. Certainly this is much likelier than the very generous odds against would suggest.
Why? Coz the New Cuddly Tories have proved crap in a crisis. Thatcher and Tebbit and Clarke and Heseltine in their pomop would have eviscerated this bunch of Labour liars, Cammo and Osborne have looked like a couple of silk-slippered opera fans bewilderingly transported to the mosh pit of a death-metal gig.
I can’t see the soft Cammo Tories suddenly finding the muscle: they just lack the ruthlessness, the grittiness, and the low cunning. The election could be Labour’s to win.
Right now, Labour are Value. And at least if Brown stays in, the pound will continue to tank, so it’s not all bad - for me.
Ciaociao!
241 - Isn’t that average simply a reflection of the fact that some mortgages have only a couple of years left to run so the outstanding balance is very small? The average is brought well down by mature loans. The thing to look at in terms of the punt people are willing to take is the size of the mortgage and other borrowings at their peak.
231. Excellent maiden post. Welcome !
254 - And those people vote too! Thus the arguments about the size of debt etc doesn’t have the same scare factor as in the past. I know extremely well educated people who are in debt equivalent to a years salary, and when they talk about bailing a banks out equivalent to £xk per person, they don’t see that as a huge problem. They themselves owe £20,30,40k (on top of mortgages), so what is £2-3k per person for the government.
254. Well it does not help heaping debt on the young if they goto univerity or college. This started under the Tories with Student loans but has got considerably worse under Labour. Millions of young adults are ball and chained with debt before they even get into the work place. They will then have to work till 70, get next to no state pension and probably end up renting property till their parents die (Leaving their hme to the kids) assuming the parents haven’t blown it all on lifestyle via lifetime mortgages.
This country is ill! It is a sickman IMO and there is nothing to be hopeful about.
255 I doubt it. Don’t forget that at local level, Labour have just disappeared from a lot of the country.
248 PtP - I haven’t used Spreadfair, but I’m tempted by the current prices there on selling Labour (basically hoping to up my average price). Presumably liquidity could be a problem when trying to close a bet early, plus margin payments compared with SPIN. Anything else special to watch out for?
255 “I think Labour are now a very good bet for the GE…”
You’ve got cocky ever since you tipped the winner at Glenrothes. Sean The Scribe has given way to Sean The Soothsayer!
Prices for a 2009 election are dropping on Betfair (now sub 4s)and 2010 rising above 1.6 (from 1.45ish)
I’m buying anything above 1.6 for 2010 - Brown will not go early.
Thank you for the welcome Peter the punter.
I have to say that I did not get involved in the USA elections. I don’t know enough about the politics on the other side of the pond and I do not bet on anything I know little about.
I am already very heavily on a hung parliament, as you might imagine. I made some very good money on the Glenrothes by election, although even I was amazed at the size of the Labout majority.
Currently I have built up a very nice bet on an election in the first half of 2009 at the highly generous average odds of around 4/1. It is this selection that I feel should be odds on and not the 2010 option.
The betting on British politics, especially on Betfair, seems to be over-run by bigots who bet with their hearts and not their heads… long may it continue!!
By the way, I am a she and not a he!
254/258 - There’s a danger, however, in going too far the other way and being overly scared of debt. Debt and saving are both perfectly normally ways of smoothing expenditure over a long period.
It simply isn’t rationale to live in a cardboard box for twenty years until you can pay outright for a mansion for the next twenty. Even outside the housing sphere, if you’re a young professional with good career prospects and a young family, a home to furnish, car to buy, student loan etc, it just doesn’t make sense wearing a hair shirt with the consolation it will be better when you are 50.
Things went too far but balance is key.
260. Not saying Labour WILL win - I’m just saying the odds against them having the most seats/winning a a majority - seem quite generous to me.
The Force is With Them. No one knew how the New Tories would cope or react in a crisis. Turns out they are rubbish. Like an orchid bred for a balmier climate - exposed to a Scottish winter. They have wilted.
Maybe this is no surprise. Compassionate Conservatism/Go Blue Get Green and all that rebranding stuff was designed to make a party that would appeal to prosperous voters, voters who wanted the proceeds of growth shared more sensibly.
There is no growth. No one is feeling that compassionate. Who gives a f*** about windmills. Suddenly the Cammo Project looks weirdly…. dated.
261 Sorry, Richard, but I’ve given up on Spreadfair. The liquidity is dreadful. I believe Mike has taken the same view.
Nothing wrong with their prices but what good is that if you can’t close out when you want to?
They also have a mean attitude towards margin calls.
255. Not been funny old mate but you are knee jerking as much as Brown at the moment.
The Tories have been hitting Labour, it’s just that the Journo’s have not been giving the Tories as much press as the government.
Take part of the speech, from last Friday (I was e-mailed from Cameron’s office) i posted on a previous thread, NP thought most interesting and did not like it but i think it was the first time he had seen it!
The Tories just need to keep buggering away at Labour as Osborne has being doing today and indeed GO has noticed that Mcnulity has made an unforced error today that could undermine Brown greatly! 
“Cammo and Osborne have looked like a couple of silk-slippered opera fans bewilderingly transported to the mosh pit of a death-metal gig.”
O/T….shame on those who work for Haringey social services!
263 Thanks for the heads-up, Ghost. I agree - a 2009 election most unlikely.
262. Mebbes! I also tipped Obama (like you) even when McCain was romping ahead in the polls. I just felt, in the end, the Bush legacy and the economy would do for the Republicans.
I’m starting to get the ominous feeling for the Tories. An not saying Labour will deffo lose - yet - just pointing out some Value. I know you like Value.
Today I cleared all my credit card debt. An oddly painful yet somehow satisfying process. Like getting your teeth cleaned.
Re: Arrrgh! I usually spell Osborne’s name correctly. Don’t know what came over me…
259 - Average student debt on graduation is around £20K. It may well be a bad thing in terms of discouraging kids from lower income families from going to university, but there is a lot of needless hysteria about it. As a monthly repayment on a graduate salary, it is far from crippling.
273. Oh fudge… that should say ‘Re: 217′then ‘Arrrgh!’
Someone needs to inform Sean T that Osborne is “a master political strategist” who should be able to “choose his own job”.
He’s been away a bit so he’s probably not been kept in the loop on that front.
266. Maybe this is no surprise. Compassionate Conservatism/Go Blue Get Green and all that rebranding stuff was designed to make a party that would appeal to prosperous voters, voters who wanted the proceeds of growth shared more sensibly.
266 To be fair, there hasn’t been much of the “hello Sun, hello Sky” stuff since before the Autumn of last year.
278. Snap!
Welcome aboard, Penny4them. As PtP says, the site tends to magnify poll trends, with enthusiasts happily posting when things go well and sulking when they don’t. The more regular posters generally try to score a reasonable hit record of accuracy, though we’ve nearly all got things badly wrong sometimes - e.g. I was sure we were going to lose Glenrothes.
On your speific point on election timing, I think it’s simple enough - we’ll call an election when (a) the immediate acute crisis is past and (b) we think we can win. If that’s before 2010, fine. I don’t buy the view that we’d fatalistically call it early when well behind, in order to ‘lose less badly’ as some posters have suggested - as recent weeks have shown, you never know what twists and turns fortune may offer, and we think we have a fair chance of winning, much though the mere idea irritates some here.
267 PtP - Thanks for the info. The difference in price is very marked at the moment - 240-246 on SPIN (was 238-244 last night, went briefly up to 242-248, then immediately dropped back a couple of notches). Compared with 246-248 on SpreadFair, with £20 per seat available on the sell.
But certainly being able to close out at any time is vital in spread betting.
274, Doesn’t leave much left over to save up the 30% deposit you need to buy a house these days.
264 There are too few female contributors to the Site, Penny, and very few of them bet, so even more profuse welcomes!
You are obviously used to making your own judgements but I have to caution that my spies have consistently advised me that a 2009 election is unlikely. Things can change of course and if they do, you will probably hear about it here first! So, if you don’t always post, make sure you lurk regularly.
265 - I don’t disagree. Businesses don’t function without capacity for overdrafts, loans etc.
However, my point wasn’t in the rights and wrongs of personal or business debt, but the attitude to it in this country. In the US, their attitude to personal debt has been completely different for many many years. Getting everything on credit is the norm rather than an exception, as a result any talk of budget deficits, government debt etc hold little traction. The people of the UK used to be very risk / debt averse and as a result voters would be scared of the size of the government borrowing and debt (in real amounts not % of GDP etc).
The Tories banging on about this now only plays to those who already understand the situation and are rightly scared of it. Average Joe doesn’t, doesn’t want it. He is only concerned with his tax bill at the moment and if his job is going to be there next week, not that massive borrowing will saddle us with higher taxes (as Andrew Neal rightly pointed out on DP today) for the 10+ years.
255 Billboards nationwide of a laughing Gordon next the line ‘No more boom and bust’ aren’t really going to help Labour at the next GE.
That phrase, and Browns obvious joy are going to return to haunt them.
266 The other problem for the Tories is that they have over-blown expectations, based on what now seems to have been temporary massive poll leads in the last few months. They have taken it for granted that they were heading for a 1997-style landslide, and now that their polling lead has come down to more moderate levels they seem deflated and are searching for scapegoats.
262, Can`t see it myself a fourth term Victory, what price would you have got for that in 97?.
However even the great maggie had a wobble in the 87 election campaign, after a good advert for kinnock.
So if she can worry on a certainty, the modern day Cameroons, could get into panic mode without reason I suppose.
266 - We are getting sensible Sean today. Your third paragraph is spot-on particularly. Time for the Tories to get serious. Just copying Blair in 1997 won’t do it. It was pretty calm economic waters in 1997 and people felt comfortable taking a punt. Potentially, this feels more like 1992 (although Cameron is somewhat more credible than Kinnock - an important difference).
286 - True. Tories would have killed for 41% at almost any other point in the past 15 years.
O/T
Dow watchers will be watching General Motors with interest today - they are a dead man walking (with Ford not too far behind)& need a bail out. Could have massive ripples over this side of the pond..
Bloomberg : “General Motors Corp. plummeted as much as 31 percent and moved toward its lowest level in 62 years after a Deutsche Bank AG analyst downgraded the shares, saying they may be worthless in a year.
“
284 Again, I think you’ll find a lot of voters, particularly older ones (who are the most likely to vote) are aware of the situation, are themselves financially prudent, and don’t like what they see.
281 Obviously I can’t say don’t so it, Richard, but I have given up on them because of liquidity. It’s also annoying when they ring you up and ask for another £1,000 to cover open positions. Not proper bookies, imo.
Tangent way back at Ken’s post @54, but I thought it was a real shame that Poindexter got fired the terrorism spread betting suggestion, especially when there were so many things he could have been legitimately fired for. This could have been the best idea to come out of DARPA since somebody suggested finding a way for people on the West Coast to run their programs on the computers on the East Coast once the people there had gone to bed.
Glenrothes notwithstanding, I shouldn’t have to explain to people here how much better the political markets are at making predictions than regular pundits. And with terrorist attacks, the case is even stronger. The government seems to have very little idea what’s causing people to attack them, and even if they do know they have all kinds of political incentives to miss the point. Much of what they continue to do about terrorism is either useless or seriously harmful. No big surprises there: They don’t have enough people who can even speak the language their attackers are speaking to each other, let alone who know how to tell the dangerous nutjobs from the ordinary ones.
There are plenty of people in the world who know about these things. If we had the right markets we could help them profit from sharing their knowledge.
Shadsy, your country needs you.
290 Even VW are reported to be approaching the European Central Bank for financial assistance
274. I graduated over 10 years ago and have yet to have a graduate job. I know many others like this as well. The debt doesn’t magic away, it is still there.
288 “We are getting sensible Sean today.”
Indeed, James. Is PB’s favorite hooligan growing old and sober? I do hope not.
I note with some satisfaction however that he has picked up the idea of Value in betting. I know it’s obvious to some, but others never get it - just like people who never realise dancing is about sex.
Not much you can do to help them.
290 - During my vacation in US, the GM/Ford/etc situation is the big big news. None of the financial experts can agree what to do, but they all agree if one goes the rest will, and it will cause problems in the US and then worldwide. The scale of dependence on the likes of GM and Ford is so large it is hard to comprehend.
If my Dodge rental car was anything to go by (and safely saying it is the worst new car I have ever driven) the US auto industry has big big problems whatever the government do. Falling sales, high cost, poor technology, poor build quality.
294
My local VW dealership closed last week with the loss of 100 jobs
285. I think turning the Hague/Portillo Mr Boom and Mr Bust on it’s head with Brown as both might be called for.
295: I’m not sure about the loan scheme when you graduated, Martin, but currently any balance not repaid after 20 years is written off. You were right about Cameron’s speech, by the way - hadn’t seen any detailed reference to its contents till you put it on the site. Mind you, although my summary may have been a trifle harsh, it wasn’t exactly headline news stuff.
Nick.. good to have an MP here. The site really DOES attract some high quality posters.. or not.. depending on one’s respect for our elected representatives.. just kidding!
The problem, as I see it, that your Party has, is that the recession is expected to be long and hard. Even if there WERE to be signs of it coming to a end in early 2010, the bad taste of the medicine that we will all have to take next year wil be fresh in the mouths of the average voter.
The other side of the coin is that after 3 consectuive terms for Labour, the natural inclination amongst voters is for change. If things get back to normality, then I think you will see the sort of polling figures that we saw a year ago, with a 20% lead for the Conservatives.
Paradoxically, Labour need the bogeyman of recession to frighten the voters into not giving the “novices” THEIR turn in power.
I would agree that if it were left to Brown, he would hang on to power for as long as possible.. that is his cautious nature. However, I believe Mandelson will ultimately decide when we get the chance to place our cross in the box and HE is intelligent enough to realise that your best chance of success is when Labour is dealing with the problem and not when it may or may not have been dealt with in 2010.
Here’s a free one for Cameron.
Gordon Brown. No more room to trust. No more boom and bust.
Copyright reserved.
295 - I’m sorry to hear that, but that is the reality of the Major (and Bliar) drive to get more universities and thus more people going to university doing whatever they fancy. It is only going to get worse, more “graduates”, and little signs of really more proper “graduate” positions.
My personal experience is that a big gulf is being created between those on the right course at the right university, and those who are not. Also competition is just much tougher full stop. Having personally studied for two undergraduate degrees, and a PhD, at two top ranked universities (one not being Oxbridge) the vast majority of my peers have found jobs which put them in the top tax band. However, having spoken to senior people in several employers that I have had contact will during my PhD research they are increasingly identifying universities / courses that they have confidence in and pretty much only take applicants from that list. One employer were extremely open about this, and even had a side in a presentation at a careers fair stating unless you went to (list of 6 universities) don’t bother applying.
302. Get on to the ad agency with that.
287 - “Can`t see it myself a fourth term Victory, what price would you have got for that in 97?”
But the Tories’ fourth term victory came in 1992, not 1997. And that has to be the fear for the Tories and hope for Labour this time. Like Sean, I think the Tories will get it in the end but the odds on Labour have some value. Can you look people straight in the eye and say with certainty this is the equivalent of 1997, not 1992?
test
298 MTF do you live in or near Horsham?
305, the question presents a false dichotomy.
2010 will be like neither of those elections. Brown isn’t as liked as Major, Cameron isn’t as derided as Kinnock. Labour aren’t infighting like the Tories were (any more), the Tories aren’t enjoying universally good press.
I still think (and did even when silly bugger 28pt leads were being recorded) that a 50-70 Cameron majority is the likeliest outcome.
CON 33.2: LAB 36.2: LD 22.7%
CON 32.8: LAB 37.9: LD 21.8%
CON 32.5: LAB 39.0: LD 20.6%
In my view this ’spread’ is well within the normal range of error of these polls, which might well be contributed to heavily by their choice of constituencies. Do they, for instance, split their samples to ensure a representative share of seats which are basically Con-Lib Dem, Lib Dem-Con, Con-Lab, Lab-Con, Lib Dem-Lab, Lab-Lib Dem, Lab-Nat, nat-Con, LibDem-Nat etc? I doubt it, which means that statistical variation is likely to have small but important effects on the overall outcome.
Personally, (having conducted opinion polls in my youth) I reckon that most polls can easily show the results for any party (or more than one) anything up to 3 to 4 per cent away from the ‘actual’ result. Then you have to take the three to six per cent of the electors (approx) who are ‘plumpers’ ie make their mind up either walking to the polling station or in it. This group is also ’skewed’ by the ‘breakfast plumpers’ - people who decide whether they will bother to vote or not (for anyone) on the morning of the election, which may also be skewed by party affiliation, sometimes more than others. There is a heavy constituency-specific effect on these elements, as well as the underlying allegience issue, in about 140 of the 600 plus seats in the country. Enough to make a difference in whether there is or is not an overall ‘winner’ by fptp.
Where I live, for example, the Labour Party has not won ANY parliamentary or council (even a single ward) election for over 35 years. Yet every surrounding constituency has a Labour MP, with the Lib Dems struggling to find voters in half of these. The people have a similar socio-economic base, read the same papers, shop in similar same shops in similar town centres and watch the same TV. Despite these similarities, their voting habits are very very different, as are their responses to the pollsters.
The only reason that polls are seen to be ‘reasonably accurate’ as often as they are is our good old friend statistical distribution, which ensures that a fair percentage of polls (if conducted and weighted well) will be within two per cent of the eventual result if a genuine election were conducted on the same day. But anyone who gets excited over polls going up and down for individual parties by anything up to 4 per cent is, in my view, generally spending too long in the t@ilet. Look at the long term trend lines for the 3 main political parties over the past year for a single polling organisation’s output. Produce a moving average over (say) 4 polls for each party. I would suggest that there has only been one significant shift in the entire time. Put that into the vagaries of Britain’s 3/4 party system (which is largely, though not totally, a collection of 2-party constituency races between different pairings of parties in different parts of the country) and you realise how useless party-allegience polls are as result-predictors other than as a statistical v@lium for anxious political leaders. What they of course ARE useful for is clever betters who need to follow NOT what the actual result will likley be but what other people who bet THINK THE RESULT WILL BE. And, in the absence of antything better to go on than their own gut feelings and ignorance, many other people ARE affected by polls!
300 - Maybe you should also mention that you government also increased the rate of interest on those loans. In fact I think I am right in saying that the interest rate was doubled last year.
re 263 good spot. Those who burnt their fingers on betting that Brown had the bottle last year could learn. There will not be an alection before May 2010.
300 - Also your statement about 20 years is incorrect. If you had a loan before 2005/6, it is written off only when reaching 65, and post 2005/6, it is actually now 25 (or 35 if you live in Scotland).
http://www.slc.co.uk/about%20student%20finance/products%20and%20services/write_off_terms.html
why is anyone bothered about proppiing up a loss making car maker? just let it go bust. its business, not the 1970s.
sometimes i wonder whether the last 30 years have been forgotten.
Gives you such confidence in your elected officials. PM talking rubbish about size of national debt, MP on here incorrectly stating the write off terms of a student loan. Goggle/Internet, use it, the facts and statistics are all there, if you choose to do a bit of research.
the thing about recessions is that they mean painful medicine has to be taken.
Brown’s cuttin’ of rates, and cuttin’ of taxes are dishonest.
The pain will have to be taken again, like it is in every recession.
This place can be reminiscent of open outcry on the floor of the LSE many years ago. In a bull market (Tories up) you get one lot of traders leaping up and down and shouting at each other, which is rapidly superseded by a bear market (Labour up) when a completely different bunch of badly-dressed, short-termist, money-grabbing chavs begins shouting and cavorting like demented fools at a mediaeval banquet.
As with the old stock exchange, the ones to listen to are the wise old heads who wander in now and again, sniff the air and follow the trends with the benefit of experience and calm rationality.
Personally, I’m closer to the demented fools in real life, but when betting I try to behave like the wise old heads. It’s paid off handsomely so far in political betting, but has let me down badly in house price forecasting.
313 - The problem is that it isn’t just one loss making car maker. One goes, 3 go, and even then it isn’t just a series of car makers. It is the dealerships, it is the parts makers, it is the knock on effect of all reduced spending in the towns where the cars / parts are made. As I stated it is hard to comprehend how massive GM or Ford would be if they went busto.
Even the “mega capitalist” in the US, whose view that any government intervention = socialism = communism, are saying we have to say these industries. We don’t like it, in fact we hate the idea, but we have to do it.
#225 You can make overpayments on my mortgage which go to reduce the capital balance - I am aware that not everyone can do this, or they must do it in large lump-sum payments.
The point I was trying to make was that the reduction in interest payments will in all likelyhood be spent on reducing indebtedness, or increasing savings, rather than down Tescos.
317 There is indeed, Oracle, a painful irony that in practice the USA has become one of the most Socialist democracies in the world.
317. Then you/they are not capitalists. You are social democrats. Welcome to the Labour movement. It’s good to have you on board.
318. Ah gotcha - I thought you were suggesting that by delaying the cut in your monthly payment you were paying off more.
I was more annoyed that an interest rate cut on 8th of October could not be actioned into my tracker by 9th of Nov and hence I wouldn’t benefit until 9th of Dec
300. Cheers Nick!
I graduated in 1998! Only another 10 years left perhaps!
Yes, Labour definetly seem to be getting the best media, from a non-political party view point: An election which is not a forgone conclusion should at least raise turnout! Indeed the Democratic Socialist branding of Labour has re-emerged. It seems odd that is how things have evolved.
But ironically i would welcome a collapse in the LD’s and a Tory/Labour two party system like in the states.
Just one article about how huge a Big 3 US Auto maker collapse would be.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/economy-watch/2008/11/report_3m_jobs_lost_with_autom.html
3 million jobs in the first year. 2.5 in the first year if only one goes and the other two merge.
Now I don’t know how impartial the Center for Automotive Research are, and it could well be that 3 million is an over estimate, but from what I heard on the likes of CNBC and MSNBC discussions, the Wall Street Traders don’t seem to think that they are overplaying the seriousness of the situation.
313 But we didn’t let big UK car manufacturers go bust either - British Leyland was bailed out by both Labour and Tory governments and eventually sold to the private sector at a massive loss and it then gradually ran down until when, in its Rover gusie, it eventually went bust it was too small to be of much significance.
322 - No, you have a lot longer than another 10 years. Until your 65 according to the student loans website.
322. “But ironically i would welcome a collapse in the LD’s and a Tory/Labour two party system like in the states”
Very interesting comment. Why? Do you like the idea because it forces people into a sharper choice? If so, I agree that there’s something to be said for it. I may vote Liberal next time, but only because it’s essentially a free bet. I’m not sure free bets are a desirable thing in politics.
139. Believe so , they said that a lot of SNP supporters applied too late.
325. Bugger!
Yes, I cannot remember without looking at the fine detail of it. I think if you made no repayment at all it is scraped quicker under my scheme. But i would have to look at the fine detail! The threshold is about £25,000 p/a to start repaying. My last job would just about of got me over the threshold but obviously i was terminated!
“But ironically i would welcome a collapse in the LD’s and a Tory/Labour two party system like in the states.”
Having just witnessed a US election first hand, I personally think it would be terrible to have only 2 parties. Technically US does have other very small parties but they get no media attention at all. With only two parties, the task of winning is simply beating down the other party and in safe-ish seats you don’t even have to campaign. In place likes California, New York, Idaho, Obama and McCain spent virtually no time. In fact I was told by a friend in Idaho that in the past 8 years, other than Bush who visited once no other major figure has ever set foot in the state. This is down to number of college votes it is worth, but also because only two parties exist.
At least having the likes of the LD’s, SNP, etc, who by law have to be given somewhat of a say, the task of winning an election is never be reduced a negative one against one other candidate.
Furthermore, given the choice of 3 proper candidates for Senate in Minnesota the people actually caused a very interesting result. A dead heat between two major candiates, and 15% voting for the Independent.
328 - That definitely used to be the case, as I know a family friend who has that happen. However, the SLC website doesn’t seem to say that is the case anymore. Simply that there are two conditions, pre and post 2005/06.
It could well be, like the interest rates charged on loans conditions which were changed last year, that in the T&C’s there is a statement which allows a change in such conditions at a later date. Much in the way that mortgage lenders are charging people large fees at the end of their mortgage periods, even though the original contracts said nothing of the sort (or a absolutely minimal fee). Those mortgage contracts also said that certain conditions could be amended at a later date without comeback.
i don’t get why if one car maker goes, 3 go bust.
326. It means that the Tories and Labour can take more ideological positions that polarise the electorate. It means politics becomes more dynamic and more interesting. Choice becomes a driver again and the staleness of the last 14 years is blown away.
Whilst i do not agree with democratic socialism, it does give some hope. At the moment they have nothing! Of course if it is a repeat of the straights the Labour party got itself into in the 1970’s in terms of union manipulation that may not be such a good idea.
Even at the last election, other than punishing Labour for Iraq. The key issues such as MRSA, Immigration and even tax were discussed in such a way that gave some voters little percieved choice. Labour have an infurating habit of adjusting their position to the the tory position. Condemning it and then later implementing it like Brown’s deep clean of hospitals. It just debases politics imo.
The reason i would like to see a more ideological joust is the possibility that more creative solutions are produced and management of society and the economy is improved. It has just stagnated under the media driven culture of Campbell/Mandelson. Brown changing his monthly media grilling did not strike me as honest politics. I simply do not like Brown, I cannot trust someone who behaves in his partisan and hypercritical way. Brown = Joke!
328 - That £25k threshold has also been reduced, it is now £15k. Again, in your contract it might still be £25k, it might be that only new loans are £15k. Obviously worth checking, and checking is again this is something that SLC have power to change at a later date.
The website doesn’t state when the £15k threshold came in and if it is retrospective. I paid mine off before finishing my PhD, so I couldn’t say with any confidence the repayment threshold was £25k, £15k or any other level 8+ years ago.
Heavens. One slightly adverse poll (still showing us 6 points ahead and over 40% support I might add) and it certainly sets the softer touches among my party colleagues on this illustrious forum quivering! One wonders how you dears are going to survive the 18 months until the election when you are prone to this sort of panic.
Steady on, chaps - we’re still ahead despite a month of global adulation for Gord Almighty, we’ve got a recession coming that will hit us harder than the rest of the world due to the meddling of the self same pseudo-deity and the “time for a change” argument usually trumps experience as witnessed in New Zealand on Saturday. Some people just don’t seem to recognise when they’ve won…
332 - “The reason i would like to see a more ideological joust is the possibility that more creative solutions are produced and management of society and the economy is improved.”
This just isn’t true when you look at the two party politics in the US. Watching the debates, the speeches, the ads from within the US, the differences in policy were actually quite small. This election is probably where there was the biggest difference, and even then most issues were I agree with him…..(although the methods differed). For instance energy independence, both said yes, McCain said that would include more drilling of oil and gas, but would also need a lot of solar, wind, tidal etc. Obama wouldn’t say much about more drilling, but agreed with more solar etc, and his difference was need for more energy efficiency.
In the end, Obama won because he is a better speaker, providing a confidence, a belief, a vision, and set out policies that even a simpleton could understand. Make less than $250k (or maybe $150k, or maybe $100k, but defintiely less than most people make) and you will get a tax cut. Also he got the black vote out, like never before, got latinos to switch, and got large numbers of independent educated whites (hit by the economic crisis) to switch.
Furthermore, the other choice was McCain, who comes across a lot like a blimping old man, and looked / sounded a lot like Bush. He backed that up with a ultra conservative VP pick, who is a small town American with limited intelligence and no experience that divided public opinion the US. To top it, they ran negative adverts with little substance, that even turned off republicans I know.
310. as it happens, yes it did, as it is done on the annual rate of inflation in a certain month, but this wasn’t a change of terms, just bad luck. the effect is smoothed out over several years
312. the original point was that having student loans of this magnitude encourages a “debt is ok” mentality, and i think there is a lot to that. especially as having a large student loan is considered completely normal/legit and is no hindrance to taking out other large loans and/or a mortgage - the logical next step.
why should anyone aged 25 save any money? their income is going to go up and up along with the value of their new home, right? why not live like a king. a pension seems a long way off at that age - and could go belly up between now and then anyway.
US vote count - Obama has today gone over 66 million votes. Total vote now counted is 125.5 million.
http://scoreboard.dailykos.com/map/