neilj
Member
Posts: 6,390
|
Post by neilj on Jul 18, 2023 14:49:20 GMT
Sorry my apologies to Colin, it wasn't him, it was you Bloody hell, I was just getting used to being innocent! Anyway, like I said, they were quoting the official report which pointed out the limitations of the analysis in the way that the BBC didn’t. It wasn't the quotes from the OBR I had an issue with, it was the Conservative Homes interpretation of them. The OBR part is in quotations, the rest is Conservative Home The OBR comment on CPTPP – “we are aware of the UK government’s published estimate of the potential impact on UK GDP” sounds like a sneering reference to the claim, highlighted by the BBC, that it would only boost growth by 0.08 per cent. That figure was indeed taken from anofficial analysis. But that estimate (from a couple of years ago) was for “static modelling” to increase growth by £3.3 billion. The report added that “this increase is not an economic forecast… UK exports have the potential to grow by 65% by 2030, not included in the static estimates…For example, as CPTPP expands to include Thailand and South Korea, the impact on UK GDP rises from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn” So the 0.08 per cent figure is a complete misrepresentation. If I just take the last comment from the OBR, they say CPTPP has the potential to rise from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn. Conservative Home then say 'So the 0.08 per cent figure is a complete misrepresentation' That is a complete misrepresentation in itself, yes of course trade can grow if other events happen, but as of now t h e 0.08% figure is reasonable. But also t h e increase from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn, would mean the 0.08% figure would increase to just around 0.25%, so hardly a complete misrepresentation. Even if everything goes well a 0.25% gain compared to a 4% loss due to Brexit is not a good news story |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 18, 2023 14:51:17 GMT
You know Neil, I nearly wrote a very similar post to yours. Then I thought maybe I should run it past my partner, the head teacher, just in case… She pointed out that some head teachers do something like that already. If they can’t make contact to sort out attendance in other ways via phone etc. then it’s policy at her school to call round the home. Apparently it rarely needs to get that far as the possibility of a visit from the Head is enough for most parents! Which is just as well because yes, there isn’t much time for that sort of thing BBc report suggested persistent absences have a lot to do with parents who simply dont think the school is poviding for their child's special needs. I wondered if that might be very variable between schools. Any thoughts? Does your partner's school have the average level of absences? I am not sure about the level of absence - I don’t think it’s that big a problem, I will have to check. That said, trying to be inclusive and taking care of different needs is a big deal for her, and I agree with your earlier post about how some parents may have given up with schools. I think catmanjeff once said they decided to homeschool for that reason? Speaking personally, looking back I would happily have left school at 14, there was little point my being there. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 18, 2023 14:54:41 GMT
"The source doesn’t matter"
The source most certainly does matter if it a proven inaccurate or misleadingly partisan source.
Would it happen to be conservative home by any chance.
The government's own economic analysis of the benefits of joining this bloc is underwhelming. There is an estimated gain to the UK of 0.08% of GDP .
In addition, the UK already has free trade agreements with nine out of the 11 members. The remaining two, Malaysia and Brunei, are controversial due to environmental threats from palm oil production to rainforests and orangutans.
Are you really suggesting that trade agreements with Malaysia and Brunei are ever going to be more than a rounding error on total UK trade figures.
It's a nonsense.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 18, 2023 14:57:03 GMT
Bloody hell, I was just getting used to being innocent! Anyway, like I said, they were quoting the official report which pointed out the limitations of the analysis in the way that the BBC didn’t. It wasn't the quotes from the OBR I had an issue with, it was the Conservative Homes interpretation of them. The OBR part is in quotations, the rest is Conservative Home The OBR comment on CPTPP – “we are aware of the UK government’s published estimate of the potential impact on UK GDP” sounds like a sneering reference to the claim, highlighted by the BBC, that it would only boost growth by 0.08 per cent. That figure was indeed taken from anofficial analysis. But that estimate (from a couple of years ago) was for “static modelling” to increase growth by £3.3 billion. The report added that “this increase is not an economic forecast… UK exports have the potential to grow by 65% by 2030, not included in the static estimates… For example, as CPTPP expands to include Thailand and South Korea, the impact on UK GDP rises from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn” So the 0.08 per cent figure is a complete misrepresentation. If I just take the last comment from the OBR, they say CPTPP has the potential to rise from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn. Conservative Home then say 'So the 0.08 per cent figure is a complete misrepresentation' That is a complete misrepresentation in itself, yes of course trade can grow if other events happen, but as of now t h e 0.08% figure is reasonable. But also t h e increase from +1.8bn to +£5.5bn, would mean the 0.08% figure would increase to just around 0.25%, so hardly a complete misrepresentation. Even if everything goes well a 0.25% gain compared to a 4% loss due to Brexit is not a good news story Well as they say, that was just one example Neil, there may be more. (I recall reading a fuller analysis back when IIRC, but couldn’t find it quickly). And if the US joins… |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 18, 2023 14:59:24 GMT
"The source doesn’t matter" The source most certainly does matter if it a proven inaccurate or misleadingly partisan source. Would it happen to be conservative home by any chance. So you took issue with the claim there are five hundred million consumers and 9 Trillion GDP. Do you have more reliable figures that show it to be substantially less? In addition, the UK already has free trade agreements with nine out of the 11 members. The remaining two, Malaysia and Brunei, are controversial due to environmental threats from palm oil production to rainforests and orangutans. Are you really suggesting that trade agreements with Malaysia and Brunei are ever going to be more than a rounding error on total UK trade figures. It's a nonsense. The issue is the total impact of the deal, and what the differences are in terms of joining CPTPP. But that is only one aspect. There is the issue of if the US joins, if leaving yet another trade bloc will go down well with EU or voters etc. "The source doesn’t matter" The government's own economic analysis of the benefits of joining this bloc is underwhelming. There is an estimated gain to the UK of 0.08% of GDP . Thst’s under a case of static modelling, it leaves stuff out as they say themselves in the report and as discussed with Neil. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 18, 2023 15:15:18 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-wNow you're just being silly. It's a fact that that's their population and gdp so what. It's also a fact that the obr based on their population and gdp estimate the value of the agreement to the UK is 0.08% of gdp after ten years. If we're going to start trading GDP figures the size of the European union GDP is £trillions more and the regime voluntarily imposed trade sanctions on the UK removing us from that tariff and free market. UK businesses according to the OBR have already seen a £ tens of billions hit on exports to the European union with a 16% fall in the value of trade compared to if we had not left. 86% of the U.K. exports to the CPTPP zone are already tariff free.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jul 18, 2023 15:19:29 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w Now you're just being silly. It's a fact that that's their population and gdp so what. It's also a fact that the obr based on their population and gdp estimate the value of the agreement to the UK is 0.08% of gdp after ten years. If we're going to start trading GDP figures the size of the European union GDP is £trillions more and the regime voluntarily imposed trade sanctions on the UK removing us from that tariff and free market. UK businesses according to the OBR have already seen a £ tens of billions hit on exports to the European union with a 16% fall in the value of trade compared to if we had not left. 86% of the U.K. exports to the CPTPP zone are already tariff free. Well, like I said that 0.08% figure leaves things out as the report it came from points out. But we can accept trade with CPTPP isn’t likely to be as big as the EU any time soon*. But you are leaving out the possibility of the US joining CPTPP. And the problem of leaving yet another trade deal. (There are other aspects touted, like creating better regulatory frameworks, then there’s the strategic influence aspect but it’s stuff I haven’t got around to perusing). I mean, can’t say I’m mad keen, some of it seems a bit like TTIP, but I’m just wondering as to possibilities. * though as I argued previously I wonder as to the impact of tech and AI on the gravity thing. Real time translation, and the shift to services more and more p.s. if Starmer or someone renegotiates with EU, it might reduce some of the GDP hit anyway? p.p.s. regarding 86% already being tariff-free: the gains of joining the zone lie beyond the tariff reductions. It facilitates lots of cross-border back-and-forth in these days of complex supply chains. (But then again gravity can impact that...) |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 16:39:02 GMT
The National Policy Forum meets soon. It will be important what starts to emerge as the potential manifesto. Starmer appears to have been making policy up on the hoof. What happens if the National Policy Forum comes up with something different? Genuine question - is it just a talking shop or can it actually set policy? Could you comment on above point. Also about LAB conf 'motions' A brief explanation of how LAB agree policies (or how they are supposed to) would be very welcome CON don't go in for any of that member crafting policy stuff (thankfully IMO) and after the 'Truss error' then even letting members elect the next leader from the final two might well be changed (as it would have been had Rishi not been the only one left last time). |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jul 18, 2023 16:49:00 GMT
Jenrick refusing to take the opportunity for both being a dick and lying to parliament. youtu.be/HdgyVRQhNsY |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 16:52:12 GMT
Betting Odds With 3 Days to go! Selby & Ainsty: 🌹 1/8 🔺 🌳 11/2 🔻 🔶 200/1 🔻 Somerton & Frome: 🔶 1/50 - 🌳 16/1 🔻 🌹 150/1 🔻 Uxbridge & South Ruislip: 🌹 1/10 🔻 🌳 8/1 🔺 🔶 100/1 🔺 A bit of expectation management internal polling for Somerton is looking promising but odds of 50:1 On seem wildly exaggerated. Getting tighter in U&SR judging by the arrows? ULEZ factor? As per mercian reply then some people will bet against the favourite when the odds are very low. Folks like putting a few quid on long shots and that could be done by either 'BACKing' an outsider or 'LAYing' against the favourite. On betfair* then U&SR has had the most money bet on the result but it's not that much money. Impossible to say whether that is due to the odds being reasonable (so no one seeing much upside) to a lack of interest - or bit of both! I've a few quid 'Backing' CON for Mid Bedfordshire, if/when that happens, on basis that LAB seem to be making an effort there so might split the vote and that it is still if/when and the longer it waits then perhaps the better CON polling becomes?? For this weeks trio then IMO it is just a matter of the winning margin, look at the swing (with is ABCON given LDEM are nailed on for 1) and look at the turnout - although it will obviously be analysed to death with lots of 'CON are heading for extinction' comments ignoring the poor predictive track record of mid-term by-elections and GE results. * Other bookies/markets are available, don't bet what you can't afford, etc. I personally prefer 'markets' as you can sit of the 'offer' side and get better odds that way (eg c'est moi offering £10 at '7' for CON on Mid Bedforshire) www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/politics/uk-by-elections-betting-28548799 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2023 17:00:10 GMT
graham“ There were suggestions in the 1930s that Macmillan might defect to Labour. “ Still might I s’pose.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 17:00:52 GMT
Perhaps you should consider voting Conservative - that would be the best way to undermine Labour. And since you think Johnson and Thatcher were preferable to Blair and, presumably, Starmer, that would seem a comfortable choice for you. Voting Tory would send the wrong message to Labour though- to be even more right wing. Might I suggest Green Party of E&W for those to the Left/Green of Stamer-LAB. If Greens start to poll higher then LAB might well realise their 'left/green' flank is exposed and given Starmer-LAB seem laser focussed on winning whatever the policies then that might see some 'O-turns' (a U on top of a U) from Starmer-LAB. Or don't vote - Blair did pretty well in '01 and '05 on low turnout though and as always I'd suggest folks look at UKIP as the example of how a small party, that is unlikely to win any/many seats, can 'influence' policy of one of the two who can form govts (and adopt a 'it's not the taking part, it's the winning that counts' approach). NB 'Disclosure'. IMO Starmer has moved too far to the Right on economic axis and 'climate delayer' on Green stuff. Given he's very likely to be next PM then I'd prefer he shifts a little to the left and quite a lot more to the Green. So little difference between CON and LAB at the moment and I don't think it is good for the country. Seeing RUK do better to help ensure CON don't 'dither and delay' on illegal immigration is important to me - I would assume Left/Green people can 'work out' how they can influence LAB (ie state Green as VI and vote Green in by-elections if given the chance). |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Jul 18, 2023 17:04:52 GMT
FACTIONALISM I guess there will always be factionalism. What has been invidious recently is that it had been based upon a profound and damaging falsehood, namely that a Corbyn government would have made the country somehow “unsafe” for Jews. This was despite thousands, if not tens of thousands of Jews objecting to this very unpleasant, fear-inducing idea. This inflicted huge damage on the Labour Party. It also permitted our opponents (and on here, my otherwise very good friends) such as steve to apply the deeply unpleasant and inappropriate adjective ‘toxic’ to Jeremy Corbyn, and leftieliberal to expound the monstrous untruth that Luciana Berger was ‘driven’ out of the party. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 17:08:56 GMT
somerjohn In common with most brexitanians Mercian likes to focus on the damage that hadn't happened yet in 2016-19 before we left the European union but after the referendum as somehow proof that remainers were wrong about what would happen when we left. Reality rears its head we left and we were right. I can't say I've noticed any difference. Ok our inflation might be a bit higher than some comparable countries but that's about it. Not exactly the Armageddon that Remainers seem to think we're in. Inflation is often quoted as Year-on-Year (YoY). IE current inflation is 2023 prices being 'compared' to prices in 2022. When exactly do Remainers think UK left the EU? Of course at the time then Osbore et al reckoned most of the 'impact' would be immediate and the £ did move significantly but obviously that 'base effect' dropped out in 2017 (1yr after the big FX move). ANFIW in a 'Groundhog Day' from the BABies but I'm looking forward to UK inflation catching up with 'base effects' from 2022 (eg how UK dealt with the Energy Crisis differently to most countries) later this year/into 2024 (which will an election year). I'm sure they find some other cherry picked data to show their ignorance... zzz ZZZ. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2023 17:16:23 GMT
Dan Wootton trending on twitter for a 5th day
The stench of hypocrisy is positively nauseating
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jul 18, 2023 17:19:21 GMT
graham“ There were suggestions in the 1930s that Macmillan might defect to Labour. “ Still might I s’pose. It's a possibility, I suppose. If he's disinterred and lives to walk again, he might well be impressed with Sir Keith Stalin's rightward drift and sign up to the "Keith/Rachel" project. During my much mourned short absence from this site, I see I've missed some fascinating historical leader beauty contests. Attlee vs Starmer; who do you prefer? Supermac v Corbyn was a cracker, and I must admit that I can't quite decide on that one. Nor Cameron vs Bonar Law Before the fascinating debate subsides, can I offer another comparison over the ages? Leon Trotsky vs Hugh Gaitskell. Who might have made the better PM? I suppose we'll never know, but it's a fascinating thought nonetheless is it not? Socialism in one country said Hugh. Leon less keen and more internationalist. Was Hugh keen on exporting revolution? I doubt it. A separate thread perhaps. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 18, 2023 17:22:29 GMT
Voting Tory would send the wrong message to Labour though- to be even more right wing. for those to the Left/Green of Stamer-LAB. Or don't vote - Goodness, there's a shock  |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,390
|
Post by neilj on Jul 18, 2023 17:24:49 GMT
Made me chuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Jul 18, 2023 17:29:43 GMT
It's a possibility, I suppose. If he's disinterred and lives to walk again, he might well be impressed with Sir Keith Stalin's rightward drift and sign up to the "Keith/Rachel" project. Get with the times Batty. It's Sir Kid Starver since yesterday! |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jul 18, 2023 17:29:45 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 17:35:32 GMT
Been busy but glad to see HoL accepting the supremacy of the elected chamber👏 bills.parliament.uk/bills/3429TBC if that encourages some GOTV for CON on Thurs or at least reduces the 'protest vote' for RUK. Probably not enough to mean CON win any of the trio but might reduce the swing?? Braverman obviously trying to make a big deal out of it - will the 'tame' press oblige with some headlines tomorrow?? |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 18, 2023 17:37:19 GMT
Leon Trotsky vs Hugh Gaitskell. Who might have made the better PM? For all the talk of factionalism in the Labour Party at least they don't settle disputes with an ice pick. (P.S. The answer is Gaitskell of course, as any fool knows. Not sure about Louis XIII v Georges Pompidou though). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Jul 18, 2023 17:39:24 GMT
It's a possibility, I suppose. If he's disinterred and lives to walk again, he might well be impressed with Sir Keith Stalin's rightward drift and sign up to the "Keith/Rachel" project. Get with the times Batty. It's Sir Kid Starver since yesterday! Missed that but the 'usual suspects' in the twitterverse are onto it... PS Given the discussion on population growth then I fully approve of Starmer backing CON's policy and no need to mention how many siblings Starmer has as his family were doing well for themselves back when Starmer was a wee laddie.  However, on the last thread I stated Starmer had "won" a bursary to continue in a private school (inferring it was on 'merit') but it appears Starmer "doesn't recall who exactly footed the bill" - no doubt we'll find out more about that into GE'24
'Hypocrite' Keir Starmer benefited from private school charitywww.pressreader.com/uk/the-sunday-telegraph/20230129/281479280551938 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2023 17:41:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jul 18, 2023 17:47:23 GMT
It's a possibility, I suppose. If he's disinterred and lives to walk again, he might well be impressed with Sir Keith Stalin's rightward drift and sign up to the "Keith/Rachel" project. Get with the times Batty. It's Sir Kid Starver since yesterday! Crikey. I'm no match for this sort of untamed wit!! 🥴😆 Mind you, I did coin Thatcher the Milk Snatcher back in the day. Got no credit for it though. Why don't we have a Sunackered v Kid Starver competition. Which moniker do we think is the best? That would breathe life into the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Jul 18, 2023 17:57:41 GMT
Leon Trotsky vs Hugh Gaitskell. Who might have made the better PM? For all the talk of factionalism in the Labour Party at least they don't settle disputes with an ice pick. (P.S. The answer is Gaitskell of course, as any fool knows. Not sure about Louis XIII v Georges Pompidou though). Mitterrand v Joan of Arc is a real poser. And Hollande v Hercules Poirot too. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Jul 18, 2023 18:20:25 GMT
For all the talk of factionalism in the Labour Party at least they don't settle disputes with an ice pick. (P.S. The answer is Gaitskell of course, as any fool knows. Not sure about Louis XIII v Georges Pompidou though). Mitterrand v Joan of Arc is a real poser. And Hollande v Hercules Poirot too. I'm concerned that one of those is fictional - I'm referring to the idea that Hollande was ever really French President of course. |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Jul 18, 2023 18:22:13 GMT
For all the talk of factionalism in the Labour Party at least they don't settle disputes with an ice pick. (P.S. The answer is Gaitskell of course, as any fool knows. Not sure about Louis XIII v Georges Pompidou though). Mitterrand v Joan of Arc is a real poser. And Hollande v Hercules Poirot too. The real poser is Corbyn v Julius Caesar for outsiders seizing power |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Jul 18, 2023 18:23:53 GMT
Some might argue both cry out et tu Brutae
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Jul 18, 2023 18:24:54 GMT
Not me of course
|
|
