|
|
Post by chrisc on Jun 15, 2024 11:10:19 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance. I thought Germans got all the goals? I saw somewhere that Rudiger is now Scotland’s joint top scorer at tournaments for last 25 years I agree. Feeding the big man up front is the tried and trusted Scottish way. Move over Jo Jordan and bug Dunc. There’s a new Rudiger on the bloc. Now how can they get him in the team for the Swiss match? |
|
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 Jun 15, 2024 11:10:22 GMT
'Why have we always got to assume the worst of centre-left Labour politicians! ' I would not go along with 'always' , but in terms of recent history two words are likely to suffice -'Tony Blair'. I say that whilst ignoring the status he deserves as a war criminal. Well ignored Graham… Also managed to ignore the good stuff Blair did. Ho hum. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jun 15, 2024 11:12:27 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance. I thought Germans got all the goals? I saw somewhere that Rudiger is now Scotland’s joint top scorer at tournaments for last 25 years For those still following the World T20 cricket, an indirect Scotland v Englsnd battle for qualification from the group stage takes place over the next day. England has 3 points from 3 ganes. Scotland has 5 points from 3 ganes. England has the better Net Run Rate. England's final game is against Namibia at 6pm. Scotland plat Australia at 1.30am tomorrow morning. If England beat Namibia, Scotland will have to beat Australia (already through) to qualify. Australia has incidated they would not be disappointed if England fail to make it. So all is not yet lost for Scotland. |
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 15, 2024 11:13:32 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "I think batty may be right, that Labour might be more radical than some may think, but of course the question arises as to how, esp. in a financially constrained situation." I actually think that to promote a more radical approach it's better to be in a position of fiscal constraint. That's when systemic change is required. New Labour achieved a considerable amount in power, but much of this was done on the back of strong economic performances and a stealth approach to generating government revenues (along with absorbing the aggregate benefits of mass migration). The systemic change was limited, and the narrative regarding tax and spend, and government intervention in general, remaining intact. This meant that when the inevitable downturn came, and public spending was constrained, the taps were turned off an most of the gains were erased. Starmer needs a different approach this time, and can actually use the fiscal situation as a driver for much of the change we need. In essence, he can hide behind the fact that there is no money to force through the kinds of short term sacrifices some will need to make to get to a more radical change. Whether he does this time will tell, but chucking money at problems is quite easy in the good times. Actually solving the problems is where we need to be now. Yes, that is a problem for lefty investments: the ease with which many can be undone. One thing that doesn’t get much attention in the list of Blairite achievements, was the NHS Direct thing, which I found particularly galling when it was axed, as it seemed to me to have a lot of potential. It can be even worse with investments, as not only can they ditch them, but they can often sell them off and use the cash to buy votes. This is why it can be helpful to have those legal requirements on governments to provide certain things, so they can’t so easily just sell stuff off. Re: “the changes we need”, what sort of changes did you have in mind? |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 11:13:36 GMT
"Incidentally, if anyone thinks leafletting is a harm free activity, I have taken the skin off the knuckles of my right hand wrestling with the man-traps some people choose to have as letterboxes these days. Some seemed designed to actively prevent any mail being delivered." - Lol I can concur with this having done a lot of leafletting in the past and regularly still for parish council stuff. Some have springs like a trap and have a brush inside that it's barely possible to get something through, especially paper. Then there are the ones at almost ground level or some houses where initially you can't even find a letterbox at all.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Jun 15, 2024 11:19:40 GMT
pjw1961I'd accept that with a best result since 2010 of 9.5% in Braintree in 2019 it wouldn't be particularly high in our target lists. If Labour can move from under 20% to displace not so Cleverly who received nearly 70% of the vote share in 2019 the very best of luck. Hopefully you'll be aided and abetted by the frog faced hate gimp targeting the hard of thinking , it's an area where tactical voting would also have to be very effective.
|
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 15, 2024 11:21:37 GMT
I got my bid in and 550 nice glossy leaflets duly arrived at my house on Thursday evening - joy unconfined. … So getting back to the matter in hand: Last night, after watching a bit of Starmer v Nick Robinson and then Scotland going 0-2 down, I forsook all that and knocked off the first 100 houses, mostly in my own street. This morning I went out early and polished off another 130, ranging further afield. I had three conversations with residents who happened to be about - I said I was leafletting for the election but no politics was discussed, however all very friendly. … Incidentally, if anyone thinks leafletting is a harm free activity, I have taken the skin off the knuckles of my right hand wrestling with the man-traps some people choose to have as letterboxes these days. Some seemed designed to actively prevent any mail being delivered. Every time I do leafletting my admiration for postmen/women increases. … I shall get the rest of the leaflets done and then see what more needs doing (last I heard 16,000 had already been delivered). I am very keen to get some canvassing in later in the campaign, but I think I will need to take leave from work to achieve that. I have already booked off the day of the election and the day after. Enough for the moment, but I will try and post a few anecdotes from Labour colleagues on how things are going later. You are currently top of the leafleting leaderboard PJ, unless anyone can trump those stats. (Am a bit concerned that it might be as dangerous as walking football tho’) |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Jun 15, 2024 11:27:10 GMT
Sorry - wrong post quoted
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jun 15, 2024 11:31:42 GMT
It's disappointing to see the rather shallow analysis of last night's football result. It is only on the simplistic and unfair Goals at Final Whistle system that Germany won. On the fair and progressive Proportional to Population System Scotland outscored Germany significantly: 1 goal to 5m of population for Scotland to 1 goal to 17m of population for Germany ( rounded to nearest million). Germany should be deeply concerned at their underperformance. Brilliant!! |
|
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 Jun 15, 2024 11:35:40 GMT
pjw1961 I'd accept that with a best result since 2010 of 9.5% in Braintree in 2019 it wouldn't be particularly high in our target lists. If Labour can move from under 20% to displace not so Cleverly who received nearly 70% of the vote share in 2019 the very best of luck. Hopefully you'll be aided and abetted by the frog faced hate gimp targeting the hard of thinking , it's an area where tactical voting would also have to be very effective. I wouldn't call Braintree a Labour target in any normal circumstances, but it is not quite so hopeless for Labour as 2019 suggests. The area is very Brexity and this maximised the Tory vote in 2019 (in comparison Labour got 27.6% of the vote in 2017). As to the Faragists, they will indeed poll well, and that will help since this time most of those votes will come from the Conservatives I think. Specially, the rural (and very pretty) north of the constituency is solidly Tory normally, but went heavily Independent at the 2023 local elections. I am informed by Labour people who have canvassed there that the locals in those parts are furious about the use of the Weathersfield base for migrant accommodation and the fact that Cleverly as Home Secretary has had the power to reverse it and chosen not to. Although these people will never vote Labour, it seems possible that they will go over in large numbers to RefUK. This helps Labour if we max out our vote in the town itself. |
|
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 Jun 15, 2024 11:50:23 GMT
I got my bid in and 550 nice glossy leaflets duly arrived at my house on Thursday evening - joy unconfined. You are currently top of the leafleting leaderboard PJ, unless anyone can trump those stats. (Am a bit concerned that it might be as dangerous as walking football tho’) I would be the first to concede that leafletting is a much less useful activity than canvassing. However, it does need doing to counter the people who complain they didn't get a leaflet and don't know who your candidate is. They genuinely do exist and I've met them on election days! |
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 15, 2024 11:52:16 GMT
You are currently top of the leafleting leaderboard PJ, unless anyone can trump those stats. (Am a bit concerned that it might be as dangerous as walking football tho’) I would be the first to concede that leafletting is a much less useful activity than canvassing. However, it does need doing to counter the people who complain they didn't get a leaflet and don't know who your candidate is. They genuinely do exist and I've met them on election days! Oh I can believe they exist, I think graham isn’t too impressed if he doesn’t get a leaflet? (Some might be less impressed if they do get one). |
|
|
|
Post by EmCat on Jun 15, 2024 11:54:54 GMT
It's almost as if they have a preconceived notion That pretty much sums up almost all politicians! "Vote for me or otherwise bad thing will happen because of {unrelated item}" They hope, of course, that most people won't stop to go "Wait a minute. {unrelated item} won't lead to bad thing." (At least not in a causative way - bad thing might happen by coincidence). And if that doesn't work, there's always the "I'll leave the logic incomplete so you fill in the gaps", which May used with her "Brexit means Brexit", which is really a way of persuading people that it is whatever your experience fills in the gaps to make it. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 15, 2024 12:06:11 GMT
Also managed to ignore the good stuff Blair did. Ho hum. A bit like saying 'the Fuhrer built some really good Autobahns'. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jun 15, 2024 12:14:35 GMT
Also managed to ignore the good stuff Blair did. Ho hum. A bit like saying 'the Fuhrer built some really good Autobahns'.  Jason Donovan says ..'Hi'.. |
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Jun 15, 2024 12:18:33 GMT
Tales of the campaign trail - Braintree edition I got my bid in and 550 nice glossy leaflets duly arrived at my house on Thursday evening - joy unconfined. An advantage of delivering your own leaflets is you do know that they are going through the right doors. In my constituency we are relying on the free delivery of unaddressed leaflets by Royal Mail (it's a Tory/Labour marginal and our only goal is to save our deposit). So far I have received two copies of our Freepost leaflet on successive days, which suggests to me that Royal Mail don't keep a record of where they have delivered them. |
|
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 Jun 15, 2024 12:28:12 GMT
I see that Johnny Mercer has said today that the Tory campaign had been “up and down”. Can anyone identify what the "up" part was? I'm at a loss to think of anything.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on Jun 15, 2024 12:29:18 GMT
Guardian
Seems the tories/Mail/Telegraph are not being honest shocker
'The number of children attending private schools in England has risen, new figures show, despite claims that families are being priced out by Labour’s plan to add VAT to school fees.
The Independent Schools Council (ISC) said last month that pupil numbers had fallen – a sign, they said, that schools were already starting to see “the impact of VAT looming on the horizon”.
But official Department for Education (DfE) data published last week shows that as of this January, the number of pupils in independent schools in England was 593,486, up from 591,954 the year before and an increase of 24,150 on 2020/21.
The ISC has also blamed two recent private school closures on Labour’s policy. However, the official school census data shows that 12 new independent schools opened in the last year, with the total rising from 2,409 to 2,421'
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on Jun 15, 2024 12:39:32 GMT
I see that Johnny Mercer has said today that the Tory campaign had been “up and down”. Can anyone identify what the "up" part was? I'm at a loss to think of anything. Presumably he used the word "cock" before the word "up"? |
|
|
|
Post by Old Southendian on Jun 15, 2024 12:40:01 GMT
We should get an Opinium poll at 8pm this evening, so it will be interesting to see if the figures match to the same dynamics we've seen in other pollsters. opinium's pre-election averages in 12 polls this year were: Lab 41.5% Con 26% LD 10% Ref 11% If the movements are similar to others, we should expect something like this: Lab 39% Con 22% LD 12% Ref 15% Thanks as ever for the analysis. I imagine there'll be many polling updates today, and maybe a few tomorrow, but what I'm really waiting for is the next (batch of) MRP(s). Does anyone have any idea about the MRP release schedule? Or if there'll be a running MRP update as was done by (I think) YouGov in 2017? |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 12:41:35 GMT
David Cameron moaning that Mr Farage is trying to destroy the Tory Party. He is trying to destroy your Tory Party Lord Cameron, and he actively wants the likes of you, Sunak and the rest of the wets out so he can take over. Where do centre right pro-EU orphans like these end up after the election? The Tory Party already in the hands of populist right wingers will look to Truss the reboot. Lib Dems maybe? An attractive proposition if the Farage factor gives them an unexpected bonus in numbers of MPs? Johnson did away with the vaguely sensible Tory party as you well know. The far right rump we're likely to end up with or what Farage would like to see is not a conservative party, I suggest you look up the word conservative in the dictionary. Sounds like you're quite admiring of Mr F. Well I suppose he did make your dreams come true 🙂 |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 12:46:00 GMT
Also managed to ignore the good stuff Blair did. Ho hum. A bit like saying 'the Fuhrer built some really good Autobahns'. Lifting huge numbers of children out of poverty, giving low income families the boost that Surestart gave them, firmly investing in education and removing NHS waiting lists were the same as Nazi built autobahns? I suggest that your own ideological quirks are far more important to you than real world policy effects on real people. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 12:47:08 GMT
A bit like saying 'the Fuhrer built some really good Autobahns'. Jason Donovan says ..'Hi'.. Don't get it. |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jun 15, 2024 13:05:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 15, 2024 13:11:20 GMT
A bit like saying 'the Fuhrer built some really good Autobahns'. Lifting huge numbers of children out of poverty, giving low income families the boost that Surestart gave them, firmly investing in education and removing NHS waiting lists were the same as Nazi built autobahns? I suggest that your own ideological quirks are far more important to you than real world policy effects on real people. Perhaps you need to read a little more carefully. I did not say 'the same' at all - my words were 'a bit like'. Hopefully you will spot the difference - and even begin to understand it. Had I been inclined to refer to 'the same' , I would naturally have commented on the wars of aggression which they did have in common. Others might wish to remind us how the high unemployment levels seen in Germany in 1932/1933 had been much reduced by 1937/1938! |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jun 15, 2024 13:15:37 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "It can be even worse with investments, as not only can they ditch them, but they can often sell them off and use the cash to buy votes. This is why it can be helpful to have those legal requirements on governments to provide certain things, so they can’t so easily just sell stuff off." Interesting thoughts. Under the UK constitution your idea wouldn't help, because a majority government can just change the law so they don't have to provide certain things, so that idea would need to go hand in hand with deep constitutional reform. An easier idea might be to tackle the ownership structure of those investments? It is possible to establish contracts and ownership systems that give part ownership of 'nationalised' enterprises to non-governmental organisations in one form or another. Citizens rights over socially controlled systems is possible, where the government itself could retain a <50% ownership share, for example. So, for example, some sovereign wealth funds are effectively state owned, while others have autonomy to act and the state could not legally subsume it's assets. I think this could be done for services investments, if there was a will.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jun 15, 2024 13:16:37 GMT
I'm a little surprised that labour isn't saying this, but...
Re-VAT on private schools.
One of the tory arguments is that middle class families that go without holidays etc. to send their kids to private schools will be priced out and that therefore, the schools in the state sector will be flooded with such pupils.
Assuming that, technically, the tory argument is correct, let's do the maths.
Currently, approximately 6.5% of pupils attend private schools.
Assuming that as many as 1 in 5 of all pupils currently attending private schools end up in the state sector as a result of this policy, that equates to 1.3% of all pupils in the UK.
Assuming an average class sze of 30 in the state sector.
That equates to one extra pupil in every third class.
The school population is, if anything, currently falling.
I think the state sector could cope with one class in three getting one extra pupil.
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Jun 15, 2024 13:19:14 GMT
Ah, those ruthlessly efficient Germans! Had we managed to string the match out for six years, including playing a mid-game leg in North Africa, perhaps we might have slowly turned the tide, but this is definitely the beginning of the end for Scotland's footballing ambitions this time round. Perhaps they should have had a piper walking up and down the touchline? |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jun 15, 2024 13:22:06 GMT
Brilliant! It does look like Jason. |
|
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: 6,700
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jun 15, 2024 13:26:35 GMT
c-a-r-f-r-e-w - "It can be even worse with investments, as not only can they ditch them, but they can often sell them off and use the cash to buy votes. This is why it can be helpful to have those legal requirements on governments to provide certain things, so they can’t so easily just sell stuff off." Interesting thoughts. Under the UK constitution your idea wouldn't help, because a majority government can just change the law so they don't have to provide certain things, so that idea would need to go hand in hand with deep constitutional reform. An easier idea might be to tackle the ownership structure of those investments? It is possible to establish contracts and ownership systems that give part ownership of 'nationalised' enterprises to non-governmental organisations in one form or another. Citizens rights over socially controlled systems is possible, where the government itself could retain a <50% ownership share, for example. So, for example, some sovereign wealth funds are effectively state owned, while others have autonomy to act and the state could not legally subsume it's assets. I think this could be done for services investments, if there was a will. Thanks muchly for your reply Alec. Yes, it’s true that in principle they can change laws. However, in practice it may not be that simple. A particular example is leaving the EU, where changing things within the EU might require the assent of a lot of other nations, and even if you leave can still be forced to retain quite a bit. Another way the laws may not be changed back, is something the right have been complaining about. When wondering why they didn’t roll back more of Blair’s moves, they said it was because they were preoccupied with Brexit. If they are presented with an avalanche of this stuff, along with other pressing needs, it may not be that easy to roll it all back. Also, if they are good changes, people may get used to them and like them, so there may be some voter inertia. Regarding ownership structure, yes you have a point about shared ownership, and I think that might be a reason why the labour are looking at what appear to be to some extent, public/private enterprises. The state puts some money in, the private sector puts in the rest. Something else I wondered about in the past on the old board was maybe the use of trusts etc. (There is also the bottom-up way of doing things, e.g. with energy, making it ever easier and cheaper people to have their own power generation and storage, regardless of what the government do. If you can accelerate this, that can be another way of doing it. You don’t necessarily have to be in politics to do this, you can run a business that facilitates it as I’m sure you are aware!) |
|
