Is the PM a true gambler?
November 22nd, 2008
Is his position-play strong enough to overcome a weak hand?
Many years before I started political betting, I was an avid poker player. I wasn’t tremendously successful, but I broke even or better at some pretty tough clubs, and knew the game as well as most. As one of the few games with as rich a literature as chess, I understood this princely game sufficiently to appreciate the very best, even if I wasn’t worthy of sitting opposite them.
-
I don’t know if the Prime Minister plays poker - I suspect that his austere and moral upbringing might have failed to inculcate in him the finer points of Omaha hi-low split or Seven Card Stud - but for those of us more comfortable with games of profit, I’d suggest that his present dilemma (and the means to its resolution) might more easily be found on the green baise than the green benches.
Since folding at great expense the strongest hand he ever held, back in October ‘07, Brown has been playing at a disadvantage - short-stacked against an impressive opponent. And yet Fortuna herself has deigned to bring him back from the depths, back within striking distance, no longer thinking about merely delaying his inevitable demise, now the PM has begun to wonder if he might yet snatch victory with some strong positional play.
This week, we have heard suggestions of an election being called this Christmas, January 2009, March 2009, June 2009, October 2009, and those who still insist that 2010 must remain foremost in our minds. Five ‘hands’ in which the PM will have the chance to go “all-in”, and risk everything for absolute victory. How might lessons from poker guide this choice?
-
The psychology can be rough when you are short-stacked, but nothing puts a player ‘on-tilt’ like the realisation that he was bluffed off a major win by his opponent. That is what happened last year, and it is understandable that Brown would want to prove his courage and remedy that missed opportunity as soon as he had a strong enough chip-stack.
Sadly, that first opportunity is rarely the best opportunity, and players ‘on tilt’ need to temper their aggressive play by looking at the situation independent of their previous mistake. The fact is that Brown folded a strong hand in October - to gamble on what is at best a 3-point poll defecit is like playing K-8 against pocket Queens: not impossible to win, but there’s a reason that you wouldn’t choose it. If this was the opening hand of the tournament, the hand wouldn’t be good enough to play, and you wouldn’t dream of playing it. It isn’t any better because of your bad experiences or your determination to remedy past mistakes. An election at Christmas or in January would be impetuous - not a deliberate move of strength - and that will be noticed by opponents.
-
Yet similarly, waiting for the perfect hand will see you waste money on the blinds, and calling bad bets, until time runs out. There are no prizes for making it to the final hand - a good opponent will recognise that waiting so long implied a lack of confidence in your cards, and will take advantage of your inability to manoevre. I wouldn’t even contemplate waiting until May 2010.
The trick is to act when you still have enough chips to make an impact, but not before you’ve built them to intimidate. As PM (with complete choice of timing) you are always in position - David Cameron will always be under the gun. You need a hand that is comparable (almost as good or better) than the hand you folded in October. If you aren’t quite there, then bluff a little. You need a chip stack that will frighten your opponent - even if it doesn’t dwarf his, it needs to be worth enough to make him nervous when asked to put every penny on the line. And then you need to play more agressively than he has ever seen in his entire life.
That leaves the three middle hands - March, June and October 2009 - to make a big play. Any of these could work, depending on when the polls are at their best for Labour, but they will be different types of hand. The June option is complicated - a paired board, with a flush draw and a straight draw obvious - the local elections, the European elections and the Tory/UKIP uncertainties mean that this would be best if a little behind. The sheer confusion of issues might make it difficult for the Conservatives to focus on just one area - difficult for them to ignore Europe as an issue in a June GE, and that gives room for drawing a winning hand from other areas. This is the gambler’s choice - impossible to predict the impact of luck.
October would be a clearer choice, although the complications of Silly Season and Party Conferences on the polling mean that this would be hardest to assess the relative strengths of your opponents’ hands - like a game of 13-card stud, where what is visible may be completely unrelated to the hand that will surface as the winner.
For that reason, I’d be tempted by March. The European and local elections are likely to dent the Labour chip-stack, as their voters rarely turn out in droves for these contests, and that could give significant momentum and confidence to the Conservatives. Going before then avoids that danger.
March 2009 allows Labour to assess the strength of their numbers - if close to even, or better, then I don’t see the point in waiting. They have two back-up dates if the polls are nowhere near where they need to be. They only need hold the ‘growing momentum’ narrative a couple of months longer, and there is a chance that the recent awkwardness of Cameron’s party doesn’t find resolution soon enough. The bet needs to be large enough to scare the opponent off, and for building momentum towards a later victory, or should force him to commit everything to that show-down.
Most of all, this is a psychological decision - factoring the size of poll-lead needed against the number of opportunities to act decisively. I make many conditional decisions at the poker table well in advance, often before I’ve seen my cards, and this means that when you begin to mobilise, you are acting to a pre-decided plan.
Knowing in advance how good the hand need be, and knowing in advance how big the chip stack need be, will determine whether this bet can be won. Once pre-ordained, then no part of the doubtful mind need be given over to making the decision - it can all be devoted to the projection of confidence, and the reading of the opponent. Making the decision now (in secret, obviously) is the smartest thing that Brown could do. And against all odds, it might even work.
Morus
MessageSpace Advertising
What a splendid article.
quite possibly the best article ver on PB.com ! I didn’t understand a word of it not being a card player but the flow, the structure, the volcabulary. it was like bathing in chocolate.
Two Questions.
1. Wouldn’t he need primary legislation to have a general on the same day as the euros ? (Two principals the same day ) Also as they are moving the locals to then what would the electoral commission say about having 3 sepeate elections on the same day ?
2. Are we expecting any polls tonight ?
Very clever article!
Very nice,Morus.
I think the prospect is much brighter for us Labour punters than for the Party itself.I have taken (for now) a massive one-way punt on Labour which I will be looking to dump bigtime and maybe sooner rather than later.
This is my thesis: There are much greater than residual chances that one week from today Labour’s prospects will be looking a lot brighter than they do right now.
If the thrust of the polls puts them just a couple of points down it would suggest that they should be favourite for most Seats.If on parity they go into Overall Majority territory.
At this point the various markets will go into spasm.There will not be an overreaction but just a reaction should do the trick for Labour Buyers or Tory Sellers.
Now for Gus Hansen……or Gordon Brown as he calls himself these days.Things are a lot trickier than they appear.However good his hand may look to the viewers,in reality it is nowhere near so strong.The Opposition may wake up with a big hand and all of a sudden that AJ offsuit isn’t looking as pretty.
The structural weakness of ‘Gus’s’ position lies in the marginals.They stopped him going in 2007.They might stop him again.
Nice article on the fix govt has got itself into with the banks
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/david-prosser-a-lending-scandal-of-the-chancellors-own-making-1030135.html
Really there should be an election now. If the Govt is going to gamble with the country’s economic future through a fundamental shift in tax and spend policy then we should have a say in it.
From the previous thread:
“The plan seems to be a big giveaway in terms of tax reductions for people on low incomes in the PBR on Monday, to be followed by the introduction of a 50% tax rate for people earning over £60k after the election. “
Which begs the obvious question:
If introducing a new top rate in 2-3 years time is going to raise so much money, why not do it now?
Interesting thread.
I think Brown has got a big problem in that his partisan rhetoric on *stimulating the economy* through deffered taxation is going to hit Labour big time. The government is going to have to identify where it is going to raise taxes for this pre-election givaway. In the early 1990’s Lamont did this and Brown very effectively campaigned against those tax rises for Labour.
My advice to the Tories would be look how Brown rammed the point home at every occasion, ironically I get the impression from reading his speeches he was a better politician then than he is now!
I still do not like him! 
I think the Tories need to campaign against the likely tax rises from day one - they have said they do not support the pre-election giveaway. It will now be the right of the Tories to highlight the tax rises to pay for Labour profligacy. Labour will be very unpopular in English marginals. There will be no early election. Looks like Brown has blown it again!
7. IIRC the 2005 Labour manefesto pleged not to raise Income tax!!
Low debt and high employment
“We will continue to meet our fiscal rules: over the economic cycle,we will borrow only to invest, and keep net debt at a stable and prudent level.” Labour party 2005 Manefesto
“We will not raise the basic or top rates of income tax in the next
Parliament” Labour party 2005 Manefesto
I detect that it was always Brown’s plan to do away with 10P as he did not mention the lower basic rate! Brown is a Fibber of the highest order!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/13_04_05_labour_manifesto.pdf
Martin Day @ 8 “I get the impression from reading his speeches he was a better politician then than he is now!”
Gordon Brown is one of those politicians whose writing is better than his delivery, so his speeches read better than they sound, and always have done.
George Parker in today’s FT”The financial crisis has left the Conservative party squirming. This is the party of Margaret Thatcher, committed to rolling back the state. No wonder Mr Osborne decried bank nationalisation before finally, and reluctantly, endorsing it. When David Cameron, the Conservative leader, denounces excessive City bonuses, he may well mean it. But Labour MPs will always jeer at the stoney-faced pin-striped Tory MPs alongside him, some of whom are beneficiaries of those very remuneration schemes……
…… Mr Brown will come under intense pressure to go to the polls early, before the recession gets worse.
John Major, the former Tory prime minister, won the 1992 election in the middle of Britain’s last recession: crucially he was trusted more than Labour to run the economy. Recent polls suggest the British public are again prepared to trust Mr Brown more than Mr Cameron to dig the country out of its problems.
“We’re having the election in June next year,” Peter Mandelson, the business secretary, told journalists at a drinks party last week, with a stage wink. In case anyone missed it, he added: “That was a joke.” But around Westminster, the idea is now being discussed with utmost seriousness.”
8 - no i think that’s a trap. It will be a mistake to specifically campaign against tax rises that they would have to implement in Govt anyway. The key will be to ensure that the tax rises are inextricably linked in the public mind with Labour, even if the Tories have to implement the bulk of them.
12 - the irony of the disappearance of “excessive city bonuses” is that there is a corollary of a reduction in “excessive Govt tax take”
Morus is right - it’s all about momentum. The Conservatives have lost momentum due to stalling and Labour have the momentum with them due to enforced actions made to try and combat the economic crisis. However, future events could cause Labour to lose that momentum as quickly as they have gained it.
The effects of his economic crisis has yet to really hit people’s pockets and they may still be beguiled by Labour’s spin and distortion of the truth.
By mid 2009 the effects of major indutrial short time will have started to take effect. There will have been Honda’s shut in February and March without pay, CORUS’s shut of half its steel production, BASF’s shut of most of its plants and so on, as well as many small businesses closing for lack of cash. Currently in my area HSBC is refusing new overdrafts as small as six thousand to small employers who have never required an overdraft before.
The weakness of sterling will continue and will cause multinational companies to enact their plans for redundancies as banks continue to hold on to liquidity. So Brown’s current poition can only worsen in the next year as he has well past the point of no return for decisive action to quickly turn around the rapidly deepening downward economic spiral.
Furthermore an disruptive action by parts of the public sector will only serve to deepen the large divide between the cushioned public sector employees and those in the private sector that will take most of the hits. These hits will be felt the most in the South and Midlands marginals that are vital for Labour to hold at the next election.
Is it back to the, ‘nasty party’ as Polly suggests.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/22/david-cameron-thatcherite-politics-osborne
As for the GE, its gonna be a, ‘long hard winter’ the speculation will rise and fall with every poll. One poll showing Labour ahead, (just one) and this site will go into meltdown.
15 — “Honda’s shut in February and March without pay” — with pay!
It is my contention that the banks and bankers, are the new, ‘hate figures’ drawing the fire away from the government, which partly explains the governments polling improvement.
The Proof!
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e5c3a918-b811-11dd-ac6d-0000779fd18c.html
15 - Is Gordon running the modern day equivalent of the Ludendorff offensive?
I still say that the key to all this is the Tory poll share. Despite everything Gordon has still not made significant inroads into it and for all the headlines about the closing gap this has almost all been done by hoovering up minor party support. It the Tories hold their nerve then the tide is likely to dramatically reverse in their favour.
16. It’s worth reading the comments. For example
Polly Toynbee
Thriving small businesses are desperate for credit. I spoke to Excelsior, a Bournemouth coach company with rising turnover and profits - yet HBOS has in effect upped its lending rate to 20%. Myriad such stories show bailed-out banks refusing to lend.
And in one paragraph your whole soufflet collapses.
Who pumped billions into the banks? Brown.
Who utterly failed to get any quid pro quo from them? Brown.
And you blame Cameron?
Astonishing.
Great article. To stretch the whole thing too far.
Cameron went all in on pocket Aces (S&D) before the flop (credit crunch). Gordon had little choice but to follow.
Fortunately for him, 3 hearts came up on the flop (love from the international stage, love fron Glenrothes, love from Mandy).
With a heart in his hand, suddenlt Brown is on a Flush draw and back in the game.
Will the next card (PBR) be the Ace of Hearts?
It could still go either way.
Furthermore the Tories must not panic and leave themselves a hostage to fortune in Government. Particularly they must ignore the siren voices from the right wing calling for immediate public spending cuts to fund personal tax cuts. The middle of a recession is not a time to be pursuing ideological (however sound) policies of a smaller state.
The key to individuals riding out any recession is to keep their jobs, not paying a bit less in tax. And cutting public spending dramatically in a recession comes with huge long term costs, and inefficiencies. The time to cut public spending aka public jobs is when the private sector is able to pick up the slack. This means greater short term savings in terms of redundancy and unemployment benefit payments and also lower medium term costs (since people out of work for longer periods find it harder to find new jobs).
There may be a short term economic case for lower taxes in a recession, but the case put by the usual parties on the Tory right is a long term one and the timing is all wrong.
I think the Tories should try and make lots of “safe and sensible” type noises and not try and be too clever or gimmicky. Keep on about how little room there is to manouvre because of McBean’s past borrowing and how if he carries on being reckless with the taxpayer’s money then he’ll end up pranging the whole country.
They should also say “sound money” a lot, because it sounds old-fashioned, victorian and very safe.
imo
Labour have never understood economics. Full-stop!
Brown’s raid on pensions is fundamental to the current crisis. By undermining future-savings to boost current-expenditure the bubble was created. At a time when we need thrift - or re-capitalisation in nEU-Labour-speek - we are opening the spigots of public-sector profligacy.
England is being brought-down by the subsidised existance of the Celtic-fringe. Time for that to end.
Anthony Wells’ Christmas prediction of a Tory-winning, but hung-Parliament (from last-year) looks good. But, as Mike often points out, the Tories are doing better in the marginals. Scotland could vote for nEU-Labour all it likes; unfortunately it’s a minor issue that should not, and will not, effect the choice of the English majority.
Anyone know the current price of Brent-crude…?
My view is that Broon will hold out until the bitter end.
Actually isn’t this all a waste of time?
Didn’t Brown say in categorical terms there will not be an election in 2009 yesterday? Yes.
If he allows there to be even the slightest doubt about it, he will face a humiliating climbdown if he doesn’t then hold one.
With marginal seats polls (NOTW) continuing to show quite strong anti-Labour sentiment, wider polls become largely irrelevant.
Perhaps this thread shows Labour has lost control, and their propaganda is now turning full circle.
If Brown thinks he’s so great why doesn’t he hold an election and let the people decide?
Excellent article, Morus - but did Gordon really have such a good hand in October 2007? I still believe that he would have lost the pot.
I think the idea of a 50% band above £60k will prove painful to a lot of those married couples in their forties and fifties who have ’til now stayed surprisingly loyal to New Labour. When the worst of this bust - engineered on Labour’s watch - is over, these folks can finally look forward to - no, not the good times - just a hefty tax rise!
The next five years look to be mapped-out misery, with the Feel Crap Factor extending way off to the horizon. An end to boom to and bust, indeed - to be replaced by a bleak plateau of pain.
O/T, but Labour are increasingly stupid.
£1,000 fine for wrong ID details
Women who change their name after marriage could face fines of up to £1,000 if they fail to tell the government, under new proposals.
To call Jacqui Smith a big-t1t is a truism. Therefore I will refrain…!
21. Jonathon you imply having Many back is a plus. Most of the public think someone so sleazy is a big negative.
Wasn’t Mandy sacked twice following allegations of corrupt and improper conduct.
First over taking money from Robinson who was then knighted by Labour, lying on his mortgage application, and using some of the money for the same purpose.
And the second time he was sacked because of allegations of having taken bribes from the Hinduja’s, in order to secure favourable government decisions, etc.
Mandelson was sacked not once, but in both cases. These are just the cases we know about. How many more are there? Has there ever been anyone more corrupt in British public life?
If this man is a plus, then Labour is in dire straits.
Just today Darling admits Cameron is right, more spending, cutting taxes today, means a big rise in taxes in the future.
May be it’s a busted flush for Brown.
“If Brown thinks he’s so great why doesn’t he hold an election and let the people decide?”
He think he’s great at economics and wants to prove it by leading us out of recession before everyone else. Sort of Moses McBean.
On the other hand MandyCampbell may want to go as soon as possible in case everything goes irreparably t*ts up during the wait.
Maybe.
In the current global economic climate the idea of “sound money” is laughably inadequate and totally irrelevant. The situation is so serious that the prudent action to take is in fact to provide an economic stimulus.
Worryingly, the Tory gamblers here still cling on to their old, outdated 1983 mantras, but such an approach would be a serious abrogation of responsibility to the British people in this quite unique set of global conditions.
The Cameron, Osborne & Co. approach illustrates they have not the grasp of the nature or quantum of this challenge. And for the sake of this nation, let us hope that enough of the electorate can see the inadequate folly of the Tory way.
Clearly, the momentum is with Gordon Brown and Labour. The people feel safer with his leadership than the ephemeral, “city slicker”, Cameron-lite brand, which will in a matter of months by history:)
29. MrJones, you sound very naive.
Brown won’t hold an election because ‘he wants to leads us out of recession’?!! That’s the funniest excuse for dictatorship I’ve ever heard.
Brown doesn’t want to hold an election because he knows he’ll lose it.
MrJones, please stop the propagaqnda or I’m going to vomit.
It’s the sound of “sound money” that matters.
30 Is that post a joke?
“Is it back to the, ‘nasty party’ as Polly suggests. ”
I certainly hope so. Not that Polly really does economics.
30. ‘The prudent action to take is in fact to provide an economic stimulus’.
Darmstadtium, you don’t list your economic credentials. In fact what you say assume somes something important. That the recession is not structural. According to Will L if the recession is structural then an economic simulus will simply delay the re-structuring process, causing a much bigger recession in the long-run.
No pain, no gain.
Most recessions occur because an economy is badly structured makes sense.
There is no evidence that economic stimulus has ever worked. Contrary to myth massive economic stimulus was attempted by Roosevelt in the 1930’s in response to the Great Depression, and it didn’t work. The Depression dragged on for the entire decade and got bigger over time.
Japan tried it and it also failed in the 1990’s, the recession became pro-longed and bigger.
The list of economic stimulus failure goes on and on. Has it ever worked? I doubt it.
So much for a PM who has never studied economics in his life.
“MrJones, please stop the propagaqnda or I’m going to vomit.”
Erm, ok.
26. Yes, the problem for Brown in Autumn 2007 was that he was in effect being asked to go all-in when there was comparatively little of his opponents’ money on the table and his hand, while strong, was far from invincible.
The key figures were not those of the headline shares but the scores in the marginals: Labour looked set to lose the net 20+ necessary to deprive Brown of a majority (under the new boundaries). To win a new mandate and a full parliament, he was sticking almost three full parliamentary terms on the table: a lot of political capital. While you can blame him for playing safe when it looked like he was in control of the game and falling for a bluff, it was understandable in the circumstances.
Still, that point alone answers the question and simply reinforces what we always knew: GB is not a true gambler. June 2009 is the best option after 2010 (can anyone quote the legislation that says no concurrent election with the Euro? I’m not aware of any such), giving as it does the opportunity to get another budget through, pass the remaining legislation Labour want in place and develop the spending plans into the next years. March/April could be pushing that process and October comes off the back of summer and the conference season when funny things can happen. However, all that is predicated on what Brown thinks are the chances of Labour winning and whether they’ll improve by the next window of opportunity. My guess is that the plan is to seriously consider June 2009 as the main date but to decide on that before speculation gets out of control (after the budget would be sensible). If it’s not then, then 2010 is probably all-but nailed on.
p.s. Presumably the spam-trap does not apply to intros!
33/34 Quite so.
28,34 LukeM. I am shocked and surprised at your comments re. Mandy. Thanks also for the economics history lecture BTW. A qualification in economics generally excludes you from the top job. Harold Wilson being the notable exception.
34 That’s probably true. People often confuse massive government spending with the natural tendency to run a deficit during a recession, as tax revenues fall, and spending on benefits rises.
30.Clearly, the momentum is with Gordon Brown and Labour. The people feel safer with his leadership than the ephemeral, “city slicker”, Cameron-lite brand, which will in a matter of months by history:)
Dream on. Your self delusion knows no bounds.
30. Darmstadium is a total astroturfer!! Please ignore.
30 - that’s absolute nonsense. Even if you were right about the value of a fiscal stimulus in the short term, come two years it’s going to have to be heavy raining in of public spending and probable tax rises that are required.
I was wondering about the fundamental historic difference between the Conservatives and Labour over tax policy, and i decided that the fundamental difference is that the Conservative by and large see taxation as serving fundamentally one purpose - to fund necessary/desirable public spending. Whereas Labour historically don’t see the relationship between taxation and public spending, but see the two separately:
Public spending is one thing that has a desirable level and taxation is another which is primarily a tool of social policy. The fact that over time one must fund the other is incidental to them.
As such they are unable to comprehend the difference between structural/permanent deficits and temporary/cyclical ones. Temporary deficits can be funded by borrowing, permanent deficits must produce near immediate responses to correct them, whether it be reductions in the permanent level of public spending or increases in taxation.
As such their entire response at present is to treat the current deficits as cyclical which can be funded entirely by borrowing, when the reality is that the probable short and medium term collapse of the financial sector as a wealth generator means that we are going to have to face up to the reality that we need a new tax and spend settlement in this country based on lower base public spending or higher base taxation (or probably both).
30. An assertion does not become true just because it is believed in. Do you have any reasoning behind why the “1983 mantras” are “outdated” (I’ll give you “old” by definition). As for the “quite unique set of global conditions”, leaving aside the fact that something either is or isn’t unique - it can’t be ‘quite’ unique - all sets of global conditions are unique but most have parallels. In this case, as mentioned by Luke at [34], the situation in the 1930s and in Japan in the 1990s was similar: economic stimuli (?) were attempted in both cases, with decidedly mixed results.
If a government invests (not spends, but genuinely invests) in schemes that will produce a future return, while not crowding out private investment, a stimulus package can work - but that is a hard trick to pull off. At the moment there seems to be a serious lack of distinction between gross domestic product and gross domestic consumption.
One other point. The government’s plan seems to be reliant on having indefinate and continual access to large scale borrowing on the international money markets to meet short-term commitments. Haven’t I heard that business plan model somewhere before?
A very good article Morus.
The PBR is very important -
1) Will it come with (I think the Treasury’s preference) deferred tax rises?
2) Where will the pain go?
3) Where will the money go?
4) What kind of effects can we expect?
Who gets the money?
Households who get tax credits are 2.8 million - mainly a Labour client group. Concentrate too much spending here (good for equity, good for stimulus) could well lead to a general feeling of unfairness.
Basic rate taxpayers - big group. Obviously the swing voter. Less effective to give those at the top end of this group money, but probably politically sensible (imagine giving money to the bottom third of households - those with annual incomes around £8,000 pre-benefits - this would not go down well with the middle third.)
Where does the money come from?
VAT at 22.5% - bad for the poor (yes, food is a higher proportion of their spending which is zero rated, but it is still regressive, good for savers who have been clobbered by lower interest rates)
New income tax band at 50% for over 50K. Good for equity. Bad for incentives. About 20% I’d guess of households. They would be more right leaning anyway, but still worth a few points off Labour.
What happens if Badgerman the Treasury are forced by Mandy/Brown to not announce where the money is going? Bad for gilts. Even announcing the deferred taxes doesnt mean that one is going to do it, but it shows a commitment to medium term fiscal stability. Bad for the credibility of the government. Probably politically foolish.
How much effect in what way?
The NIESR report on fiscal stimulus is interesting. The model assumes that the crisis is 4 quarters, which is probably overly optimistic and it relies a great deal on backward looking consumers who are credit constrained. They cannot borrow against future income to consume today and are being helped out by the government borrowing for them and letting them consume today.
Still it’s worth showing the impact of a 1% of GDP spend:
Tax rebate +0.24%
Direct taxes (income tax) + 0.17%
Indirect taxes (VAT) + 0.19%
Government consumption + 0.63%
Why are the numbers so small? Because very few consumers are liquidity constrained in the UK - as UK financial markets are very flexible. Note that cutting VAT brings forward consumption more effectively than cutting income taxes. I dont like it very much as the equity element is poor and it is less effective than a tax rebate - the effect of which would be larger if targeted to the poorest third.
Note that government consumption gives you the best bang for buck -it is all spent, although not necessarily wisely.
If there is a coordinated fiscal expansion of 1% of GDP for all countries
Tax rebate +0.4%
Direct taxes + 0.3%
Indirect taxes + 0.34%
Government consumption +1%
The problem with this is that not everyone is going to coordinate - each country has it’s own pet projects. Still better than a kick in the teeth. Why are the numbers higher? - because the UK benefits from the extra exports.
http://www.niesr.ac.uk/pdf/Fiscal%20policy%20action%20in%20the%20banking%20crisis2.pdf
Note that these show the effects only in the first year (there would be a smaller but still significant rise in the second year). Note that this means if the UK borrows 1%, it boosts GDP by 0.24% (without coordination - which is the correct assumption) from where it would be otherwise if we assume a tax rebate. I’d guess that if you target it well, it might well be higher than this.
The downside is that if the economy is rubbish again in 2010, for no fiscal boost, you have to maintain the level of borrowing.
I agree with those who say its all about momentum. If (and I agree its a big if)Labour can sustain their recent better poll ratings into January then I agree with Morus that a February/March election could be the smart move. It is difficult to see how events in this possibly unprecedentedly harsh recession and financial crisis will help Labour as time moves on. At the moment people are seeing interest rate/tax cuts, lower petrol prices etc- plenty of upsides in fact. Anecdotally there are signs that in the Labour areas of my Tory held constituency that their vote is holding up well - certainly not the case last summer for example. Labour taking strong action seems to have fortified their vote.
However post 15 (Financier) above should be noted. The cumulative effect of bad news through 2009 can only be bad for Labour. Comparisons to 1992 are very dangerous. In that election there was strong evidence of a last minute switch to the Tories,the threat of John Smith’s Nat Ins rises and sudden doubts about the prematurely triumphant Kinnock as PM being the main factors for this. Early doors Labour will be given the benefit of the doubt re their actions to tackle the crisis. That will seep away and possibly quite quickly as reality sets in. Gordon should be checking the Queen’s diary for Q1 next year.
Also the policy responses at the moment should not all be about the short term. Most of us have several decades still to live. Labour’s position is that the most important thing is to find a policy that makes the recession as short as possible - the consequences of getting it wrong being the recession lasting several months longer than necessary. Conservatives position is that it is most important to get it right in the long term, the consequences of getting it wrong being decades of lower living standards. That’s not to say that either’s policy solutions are necessarily appropriate for their position - maybe either’s is actually appropriate for the other’s position but that it the motivation driving each.
You pays your money…
46 - Ken i think any 50% band would be a lot higher than 50k.
A interesting article and analogy by Morus, but to correct a few points.
Gordons austere and moral upbringing:
he was at least upper middle class and I am sure has absolutely no idea about austerity, he certainly has never had about prudence. I think he has always gambled and the difference between now and last year is that he dithered because he didn’t believe in his spin team and the media being with him, with shameless people like Mandelson and campbell he believes they will say or do anything - and he is right. As for Moral, the mans morality is constantly in doubt for example the morality involved in the 10p tax decision, his involvement in the ecclestone affair and the shadowy smith instsitute, and of course bringing back uber corrupt mandelsaon.
Since folding at great expense the strongest hand he ever held, back in October ‘07 and like the realisation that he was bluffed off a major win by his opponent.:
There was no strong hand, he had a honeymoon bounce, that was already turning and it forced him to call off the election. There was no bluff. Brown would have come out of that election with fewer seats, thats what the polls were saying, thats why it was called off.
“difficult for them(the conservatives) to ignore Europe as an issue in a June GE.”
Why would they would want to. the only thing to say about Europe is that Labour lied about their manifesto pledge and conveniently enough in an election the next thing to say is how many manifesto pledges are labour lying about this time.
48 Absolutely correct.
O/T Hull City cracking value at 15/4 with bluesq.com to beat Portsmouth this afternoon in the Premiership. Hull are great road travellers - they’ve won 4, drawn 1 and lost 1 (and that wa 4-3 at Old Trafford). Portsmouth are quite ordinary at home - won 3, drawn 1 and lost 2, losing 2-1 at home to Wigan in last match.
I’ve also backed Hull at 9/1 to win by 2 goals or more with bet365.com. The 15/4 match win price is terrific and bigger than the betfair price. It won’t last.
OT
The economy
We in the UK can sti,ulate all we like.
From John Mauldin
“And if Goldman Sachs is right in its latest revised forecast, the (US) economy is going to need some help:
“Goldman said it now expects U.S. GDP to fall 5 percent in the current quarter, with unemployment rate reaching 9 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009. It also forecast the 10-year yield to fall to 2.75 percent by the end of the first quarter of 2009, as compared to previously estimated 3.5 percent.
” ‘The combination of weaker real activity and slower inflation means that profits of U.S. companies will fall even more sharply than we had previously expected,’ Goldman said in a note to clients. Goldman now sees economic profits falling 25 percent in 2009 on an annual average basis, the biggest drop since 1938. It had earlier expected a fall of 20 percent. Goldman expects unemployment rates to further go up in 2010 as well, as there is little chance of the economy returning to trend growth by that year.”
Other mainstream economists think GDP might fall this quarter by as much as 5%. That does not bode well for retails sales this Christmas
”
A 5% fall in US GDP is going to reverberate around the world.
51 - although in fairness, i haven’t factored in the possibility of a major world war lasting 5 years with millions dead…
53
Link for the above
http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/learnmore
OT — Obama’s foreign affairs team full of hawks and warmongers.
http://www.infowars.com/?p=6131
Labour in Scotland and in England(Brown,Darling et al) have opposed the SNP Government’s plans for a Local Income tax to replace the Council Tax, on the grounds that while benefitting lower income people it will hit “hard-working families” (code for middle-class households with 2 earners).
Now it appears that the same unprincipled Nulabour crowd are going to give tax cuts to lower income people to be paid back by tax increases on the aforesaid “hard-working families”.
If this is in fact is what is announced on Monday I hope that Cameron/Osborne come down on them like a ton of bricks for the lack of consistwncy. I’m sure the SNP will.
53 - where the hell do you put money if you’ve got it?
Good morning all , just getting ready for my foray to the shops .
FWIW , my take is that there will be no election until 2010 . Lanouyr has set out it’s position , stimulate the economy with tax cuts to be paid back at a later date when the economy recovers . They hope that by early 2010 there are enough green shoots to show that the corber has been turned and they will be reelected on a wave of relief if not thanks .
The Cobservatives have dressed themselves in a doom and gloom austerity 1930’s set of hair-cloth policies promising prudence but noshort term hope for the economy . They will talk up every bit of bad news for the economy and hope that in 2010 the recession is still going strong and the Labour government pays the price .
In the coming months individual opinion polls will probably be volatile but not of great significance , the parties’ private polling may be more significant .
One of the most important and significant posts made on here in the last couple of weeks was by Andrew Cooper of Populus who gave the findings that 30%-40% of voters may well change their minds drom how they say they are going to vote now . This volatility makes any individual poll of little significance in foretelling the result of the next GE and the Conservative’s comfort blanket that they are still polling 40$ plus is shaky ground when 30% of those sypporters say they may change their mind .
Did anyone hear that Anatole K???? the Times “Economist” this mornning on R4 at least I am prety sure it was him….. I was slowly awakening, and I am sure I heard him say that the money Labour are borrowing may never have to be paid back as the Govt could print it. He said it wasn’t inflationary as we were facing deflation.
Is it just me or is this politics of madness. Printing money just makes everyones money worth less and god knows what it would do to Sterling on the foreign exchanges.
Did anyone hear it who coiuld comment further pls.
I have to stand aside from the consensus so far, because this article has a fundamental flaw: unlike different hands of p0ker (as it is played in more respectable circles anyway), the various options when to go to the polls are interconnected. The analysis is interesting, but while a p0ker player can reasonably hope to be dealt two aces next time, the political leader knows that the hand in three months’ time will in all probability not be markedly different from the hand that he has at the moment.
If I were Gordon Brown I would be thinking very carefully about an election in late February. He cannot expect to maintain momentum indefinitely, so he should be calling an election to capitalise on it. To call it now would smack of panic. I would wait until after Christmas, claim that the ship has been steadied and then hold an election, running on the basis of experience in a time of crisis.
o/t forgot to add I strongly fancy stoke to take apart west brom. a hull/stoke winning double pays around 9/1
58 Horses. I’ve got a solicitor client whose work has disappeared, but who’s just sold a valuable flat, which frees up money for betting on horse races.
50 - Fair points, but some clarifications - I meant ‘austere’ in terms of character, rather than a claim of poverty. Similary I don’t think it’s unfair to claim he had a ‘moral’ upbringing from his parents - he may now act immorally, or that morality may be warped to our sensitivities, but there is no doubt surely that he was brought up in a way that encouraged him to think of his actions as being moral. You get my point, anyway - not a pro-gambling, hippy liberal fest!
‘Strongest hand’ rather than strong. I don’t disagree, but it was his best chance, if not a good chance. The Tories were not that eager for an October election, but they announced the IHT changes and hoped he would back down. In poker terms, that’s a bluff, and it worked.
I think the Tories going on about Europe plays right into Brown’s hands as ‘the same old Tories’ and makes Cameron less attractive to the centrist Blair voters who never exactly warmed to Hague’s campaign. Also the withdrawal from the EPP becomes an issue, and Brown would claim this was a loss of judgement - statesmen need to co-operate on the best of terms etc etc.
I think a June election would be a mistake for Labour, as I don’t think they have much to be proud of on Europe, but it’s not something the Tories should want to fight a GE on either.
63 - Yep but that plan only work if you lose
I have been trying to work out why future tax increases have been leaked via both Robert Peston and Nick Robinson. It seems so counter to the normal government spin operation (”we are saving the world!”) that I just get the feeling it’s a prelude to a back me or sack me election.
61 Isnt being dealt a pair of aces a 221/1 shot?
49. If its a lot higher than 50K then the tax take from it shrinks swiftly. The old Lib Dem idea of 100K people is a non-starter - the average income for this group is massively skewed by a small but very high earning tail, who would undoubtedly wriggle out.
You need to pitch it at that level to get a decent increase in tax revenues. A 5% increase in VAT is worth £20 billion. An increase in the tax rate of 10% for those earning over 50k brings in something similar.
53 Madasafish - a cheap shot but one is tempted to say if Goldman’s forecasts were worth anything more than hanging on a nail in an outside toilet, they wouldn’t be in the mess they are today… Frankly, they are just as likely to have over-compensated for the “downturn”* - although it is hard to see where corporate profits are ging to be made in the next few years.
But good to see them finally coming round to your oft-touted “we’re doomed!!” position.
*(c) BBC
60 Northern Rock sounds a model of prudence by comparison.
Actually, for all the talk about nationalising banks, Northern Rock provides a case study in how a nationalised bank might operate - very reluctant to lend, and very aggressive when it comes to repossessions.
60 - Inflation makes people’s money worth less, not printing money.
58
Alex
Part of Mauldin’s letter covers deflation and Bernanke’s famous “helicopter” speech. (see below) >if they go for the last resort and print money, inflation and collapse of the dollar beckons.
And gold at $2000?
(I am NOT - repeat NOT- a gold buff. But gold is going to takeoff - and gold miners as well - in anticipation of this happening. Even if it does not…)
“With that in mind, let’s revisit Bernanke’s speech. Every central banker is mindful of Japan and the 1930s in the US. Deflation is something that will not be allowed. But what if the Fed lowers interest rates to zero and demand does not pick up, along with a little inflation? Quoting Ben:
“To stimulate aggregate spending when short-term interest rates have reached zero, the Fed must expand the scale of its asset purchases or, possibly, expand the menu of assets that it buys. Alternatively, the Fed could find other ways of injecting money into the system — for example, by making low-interest-rate loans to banks or cooperating with the fiscal authorities. Each method of adding money to the economy has advantages and drawbacks, both technical and economic. One important concern in practice is that calibrating the economic effects of nonstandard means of injecting money may be difficult, given our relative lack of experience with such policies. Thus, as I have stressed already, prevention of deflation remains preferable to having to cure it. If we do fall into deflation, however, we can take comfort that the logic of the printing press example must assert itself, and sufficient injections of money will ultimately always reverse a deflation.”
Just a thought here. We could see real drops in the CPI next year. We could also see a US government deficit approach $1 trillion and go right on through that heretofore unthinkable number. As I wrote last week, a reduced trade deficit means that there will be fewer dollars abroad to buy our debt. The difference will have to be made up by either increased savings in the US or higher rates to attract buyers OR the Fed monetizing the debt.
I think the Fed would be highly reluctant to monetize debt in a period of inflation like we have been in, no matter what problems we face. But in a period where we could be facing deflation? It is very possible they would consider monetizing the debt, as will central banks all over the world.
We are in unprecedented times. A (1) deep recession coupled with (2) financial institutions deleveraging, added to (3) a consumer who is going to be forced to save more and spend less while (4) commodity prices are falling, on top of (5) a serious slowdown in the velocity of money, and you have the makings of a perfect deflationary storm. The Fed would be forced to fight it.
What would they do if lowering the Fed rate to zero was not enough? As Bernanke stated, they would simply set the rates for 1- and 2-year notes and further out the curve if they felt they needed to”
66. Peston serves the Treasury. Not No.10.
71 printing money causes inflation….
69. Goldman made money during the crisis - they shorted MBS and did well enough to survive. Of the Ibanks they are the most competent.
66 - Not necessarily. There are suggestions that it’s all part of the 10 Downing Street vs Treasury Turf war ie. this is a Treasury briefing warning Gordon off.
Just read the article Morus (how rude of me to post first). This is one of my favourite ever PB articles. A triumph! And who can ever tire of paintings of dogs playing cards? I will certainly be looking at a March and June election closely.
[46] Ken, I was under the impression that the VAT rate was set in Brussels, and couldn’t be altered by national governments. Still, if you think it can be hiked by a half, I’m sure I must be wrong.
And sometimes inflation is a good thing compared to the alternative…
The BoE’s target rate is for 2% inflation not zero.
59 Mark, some slightly bizarre typos in that post which suggest even your typing fingers have moved further to the left!
61 - That’s an interesting comment, but I actually disagree. To a certain extent, the key fundamentals in poker are position and size of chip-stack. These have a similar continuity and relationship over time as poll numbers and political situations over time.
The cards are less important at a good game, because you should be playing the man not the cards. Good cards are worth nothing if you can’t force a profitable showdown. You need to make the key decisions independent of which cards you’re dealt. Only at the very extremes (A-A v 7-2 offsuit) should the cards themselves influence your key decision-making. They are a secondary consideration.
Over time, the cards dealt to each player will work out about the same. As soon as you start relying on the hope that a great hand will fall into your lap, you’ve already lost. There will be no pocket Aces magically appearing - the playing needs to be done with timing, position, and chip-stack with a dash of bravado. And a quick prayer to Doyle Brunson.
77 - Minimum rate is set in Brussels, I think.
77 I think that minimum rates are set by Brussels, but there is no maximum.
67 - Yes, but it’s a 221/1 shot every time. If you had a 20% deficit in the polls 3 months ago, have a 20% deficit in the polls today, it’s a damn sight less likely than 221/1 that you’ll have a 20% lead in 3 months time.
76 Thanks Henry, and to all of you who have been so kind.
If you love/hate the picture of dogs playing poker (or just like a laugh) you need to watch this video and listen for the reference.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=8L1Q6rTfdg0
74 Ken, are there still UK/US restrictions in place on shorting, do you know? And if so, are they restricted to certain banking stocks?
80 - You presuppose ordinary distribution of cards over time. There is no such ordinary distribution in politics.
In politics, the cards are always stacked one way or another. If you’re dealt 7-2 offsuit every time, even the best p0ker player would struggle.
86 - I’m presuming ordinary distribution of polls over time as well!
86
Gordon is 72 offsuit!
Not sure if this has been posted yet - from DailyKos, a rather striking photo-montage of George W Bush’s term in office, to accompany the words of Ozymandias:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/21/191657/65/267/627232
87 - But that is an unsafe assumption. Polls, unlike cards, are not random. There is a reason why the Tories lost 3 elections in a row and that had nothing to do with distribution of polls. The Tories went for years without an opinion poll lead - and for a very good reason.
62 The first recorded sighting of a Stoke City astroturfer
“No more boom and bust”
77
Once imposed VAT cannot be removed, however it can be reduced to the lowest level permitted which is 5%!
The ft on Brown and the early GE, is Mandy joking?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/858e0940-b7ed-11dd-ac6d-0000779fd18c.html
60. Hmmm. Gavyn Davies, who is close to Brown, has been floating the idea too. Now Labour’s cheerleader Kaletsky piles in.
69
M Mark
My last post in moderation.
See Ken;s reply.
My comment on Gordon Brown’s hand.
If he was a player of the game , he would fold now. And go for an election ASAP.
Otherwise bluff and hope things get better by 2010.
Mid 2009 is economically a total disaster.. and I mean total - for everyone - US and UK and Europe as whatever measures are taken NOW - will not have Worked by then.
Time is Gordon’s greatest hope. Hope actions work. If they don’t , he’s stuffed.. (and so are we.)
So hold and bluff .. and raise and hope your opponent folds.
27 - MArquee Mark, to strain the analogy, I think Brown was holdidng the non-nut mid-high straight after the flop, and Cameron was on a flush draw with turn and river to come.
Imagine Cameron had pocket Jacks (hearts and diamonds), whereas Brown was holding 8-clubs and 9-spades
Flop comes down 6, 7 and 10 diamonds. Odds say that this goes 60%-40% to Brown, but the IHT proposal was a bluff at having already hit the nut flush. I’d feel fairly confident playing the flush draw here - if it comes off its going to be a BIG win, because the other guy was confident enough to play. That said, no complaints about bluffing him off a pot either.
The problem is that none of us can really envisage what a Labour election campaign would look like.
The Labour recovery has followed a period in which just three ministers have really been in the public eye - Brown, Darling, and Mandelson. I can’t see what role the latter two would play in an election campaign. All other ministers seem to have vanished off the face of the earth, just popping up to make occasional deck-clearing announcements (eg Blears on 42 days).
David Miliband. John Hutton. James Purnell. Alan Johnson. Ed Miliband. Ed Balls. Where are they and what are they doing?
An early election campaign, if there is one, will be highly presidential and will involve a lot of messy economic statistics being banded around. I just don’t see Labour coming out of that on top.
Excellent article Morus. One of the best on pbCOM I have read.
90 - I’m not so sure. In this grand mystical world…!
You’re right, there is agency involved in maniuplating poll numbers, which is why in the article I made the cards ‘political circumstance’, and the poll numbers ‘chip-stack’.
Does that work better - political circumstance is evenly distributed between parties over time? Or does reality actually have a liberal bias?
92. No! The minimum rate for VAT is 15%. 5% is the minimum for a list of excepted items, the constitution of which was settled by horse-trading between member states - if you let us exempt x, we’ll let you exempt y.
96. It would be entirely about Brown. That is the whole point. There does not seem to be an appetite for the Labour project in the large, but Brown the Saviour is polling well. A referendum on Brown, and hope the other nasty stuff is ignored
64 Ok you imply he would not be a gambler due to his upbringing, I think he would not truly gamble if the odds were against him(e.g. if the media narrative were currently against him, I doubt he would be gambling on tax cuts). As always he will try and stack the odds in his favour getting people like Campbell and Mandelson who will literally say anything whatever the cost on side have put the odds in his favour. I take your point on moral upbringing but I disagree that he would be averse to gambling due to morality.
So perhaps on the main point we agree but he is certainly not the upstanding gentleman that was the implication.
I would argue it is not a bluff if the Tories had a stronger hand, and that is what the polls were showing.
Labour can say what they like, If I were Cameron I would be delighted to be asked about Europe in an election campaign as the Tories are on the Public’s side and it draws attention to both Labour and Lib Dems lying in their last manifestos, which just begs the question what are they lying about this time.
92 VAT cannot be reduced to less than 15% because of EU legislation, although certain goods can be reduced this if identified by the EU e.g. fuel.
Note also that the whole reason for VAT existing is that it pays for the EU itself. So adjustments to VAT do not have an effect on short term domestic tax income (as it is paid to the EU), VAT is used more to stimulate / reduce demand in an economy.
102 - I don’t think the Tories had the upper hand - I think they were close to having. See my example at comment 96 - they were in a good ‘drawing’ position (winning hand if certain cards appear) but they weren’t actually holding the winning card at the time of the conferences.
Gosh- over a 100 hundred posts and no sign yet of any right wing numpty’s slagging off the Beeb. Must be a first.
94
re-yesterday
As u think regulators set utility prices,(they don’t) perhaps a perusal of this site, may increase your knowledge,(zero) of their actual role.
http://www.uknetguide.co.uk/Finance/Utilities/Utility_Regulators.html
Looking at the DOW performance yesterday, and it say’s just one thing: anybody but Paulson.
Timothy Geithner, Obama’s chosen is approved simply because Obama chose him. What a way to run an economy.
107 Addendum:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7743226.stm
98 - I disagree on a more fundamental level than that. In politics, the cards have memory.
102. Can we please stop this “lying” rubbish. Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats fulfilled their manifesto commitments. There is a legitimate debate to be had over whether the Lisbon Treaty had the same content as the constitution. But the whole reason for holding a referendum on the constitution - in the opinion of all parties - was that it was a constitution, not just a normal treaty, and therefore had constitutional effects.
109 should be addressed to 99.
95 Can we just play “snap” instead?
Perhaps bridge is a better analogy. In the 2007 Labour Conference, Brown went and made a confident bid of 3 no trumps. He truly thought he could make that. Then at his Conference, Cameron - based on a bidding signal from Osborne (using the “IT” system) startled Brown with a bid of five diamonds. Brown checked his hand (in the constituencies) and seeing just the king of diamonds there - on the wrong side of the ace - and fearing the finesse, couldn’t raise. So he just sat there and watched Cameron “and that dummy Osborne” make the contract. One rubber down.
105 “over a 100 hundred posts and no sign yet of any right wing numpty’s slagging off the Beeb”
But just wait for the midday repeat of the News Quiz!
85. As far as I know, the US SEC provisions lapsed on October 17th. The UK restrictions are still in place until 16th Jan.
UK list here
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/Shortselling_list.pdf
109 - The cards have memory! And a peverse sense of humour…
In all seriousness, you are correct - the analogy can be overplayed. Politics isn’t poker, but some of the finest politicians of the modern era have been avid players, and allowed it’s mentality to inform their political strategy. Truman, Nixon, Obama are all very good players by all accounts.
There is a great philosophical debate to be teased out by the inadequacy of the example - let’s pick it up over a drink at the next PB.com gethering!
Firstly hats off to Morus for one of the most entertaining and well-written articles ever published on here.
Secondly, one of the things I think we are all in danger of under-estimating a bit here is the slow-burn nature of recessions. I remember seveal of them back to the 1970’s and the abiding memory never quite fits the statistics. For instance the early 1990’s recession didn’t officially get underway until 1991 yet I closed my company in February 1990 because business had collapsed and my bank refused to help. There was then a long intro to official recession with house prices being talked down throughout 1990 and 1991 but nor seriously falling off a cliff until ‘92.
By 1993 the statistics said the recession was over but the green shoots of recovery didn’t actually appear ubntil the mid 1990’s and the feel good factor didn’t come back until house prices began recovering fast in 1996.
There is therefore a much longer ‘phony war’ period than I think many punters are anticipating; sure it’s going to be bleak for a few people in the first half of next year but mostly it will still be anonymous stats and paper wealth being lost by rich people - the mass unemployment, blighted high streets and boarded up housing estates which may yet occur won’t be a feature until 2010. Brown can go this year, and maybe even make it to spring 1020 without fearing blame for the crisis.
112 - I wish I played Bridge. I’ve committed to learn as a New Year’s resolution. The esteemable Mr David Kendrick is one to talk to about Bridge.
At present many commentators are assuming that the economic depression will short and sharp, but current indications and liquidity favour a severe and very slow climb out - whose start could be well past 2010.
Thus we require both short term (to kick-start the stalled economy)and long term policies (to underpin the eventual recovery).
Short term can only be factors that have a very quick reaction.
Examples are reduction of VAT to 15% (this is not a time to worry about EU rules and consultation) to promote spending.
Also a reduction in the tax on employment - Employer’s NI. My company could employ tomorrow 10% more staff if that was eliminated.
There is a requirement that the banks release some of their new-found liquidity to oil the wheels of commerce.
At the same time HMG should minutely review its spending and cut out all waste - quangos and partly employed people. Yesterday I interviewed two civil servants who have been on gardening leave for more than six months on salaries in excess of 50,000 as their old jobs are no longer viable. I could not match their current holiday and pension benefits and so left them with HMG. It is estimated that there are up to one million people like this in HMG and local government, who are a tax on the economy.
Long term: We have to provide and lean and efficient civil service and local government and upgrade our vital services and infrastructure as well as the skill sets of those who no longer have the skills required for this century. This means going back to a rigorous and sound education and re-education, without any political correctness and interference of human rights legislation.
Incidentally I have it on very good authority that at a regional office of the Equality and Human Rights Commission there are many staff on sick leave due to stress caused by senior management bullying.
In response to where to invest one’s money, I would keep it offshore in the form of easily convertable secure assets. However, investment income requires a little more thought. Many people I know will be investing in equities, land and property at the right time and in the right countries from their cash reserves.
107. No, Geithner is a great choice. I like Larry Summers, but Geithner is very good too. As head of the NY Fed he is charged with a lot of the operations of the FRB. I also dont think Paulson is doing a bad job given the hand he was dealt. It’s very credible in my view.
I see the odds for a pre-Christmas election have been reduced from 100/1 to 50/1 lol.
That should of course been ’spring 2010′ not spring 1020 in post 116!!
120 - I think Peter from Putney managed to get 280 odd last week!
110 I feel I touched a nerve there!! There is no serious debate over whether the Lisbon treaty was the same as the constitution. It was 98% the same. It is just desperate sophistry to pretend it is different in any substantial way.
115 - Having attacked the foundations, I do think that you make some excellent points on timing. Like you, I would be very wary of going to the wire.
The point that Nick Palmer makes occasionally (why would we go early just to lose by less?) I regard as asinine, since the answer is obvious: to have a chance to win in 5 years’ rather than 15 years’ time. It is broadly why I think Labour should go for the polls very soon.
117 - I love bridge, but don’t get enough opportunities to play now. Be warned, it can take over your internal life, keep you lying awake in bed thinking about hands for hours.
110. There is no legitimate debate. It was the same thing. They cut ou the bits to do with the anthem and flag, then implemented those seperately.
118 “Incidentally I have it on very good authority that at a regional office of the Equality and Human Rights Commission there are many staff on sick leave due to stress caused by senior management bullying.”
Priceless!!
123. Sorry, I forgot that only Tories have seen the light. What a shame that 2/3 of voters at the past three elections have chosen to vote for the “desperate sophists” of the centre and left.
New York Times thinks Obama will govern from the centre:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/us/politics/22assess.html?_r=1&hp
I guess his aim is to weather the storm and get some concrete achievements in place on health care and tax reform, as down payments on more radical reforms after 2010 or 2012.
129. Or he’s not going to turn America into a European style state ever. It must hurt to see the possibility. And all those hawks! Clinton with her nuking Pakistan comments. Troop levels to rise in Afghanistan.
128 Don’t get on your anti-tory horse Jack, the point is you bring up Europe you have to explain why there was no referendum, there is no legitimate reason and it plays into the Tories hands as the question can be asked what are they lying about in their manifesto this time. This is what comes of breaking manifesto commitments I am afraid.
Two more posts disappeared into the ether. What’s going on?
121
Yes that King Canute, (who was of course a Tory) had a lot to answer for, the damage that man did!!
131. I agree - Cameron would be less afraid of discussing Europe in the GE than Morus suggests. (It might however be argued that this would play into Brown’s narrative of pragmatic statesmanship versus outdated ideological Thatcherism. Still don’t see how Brown could pull it off though.) A March or October election would be much better.
I just don’t think that throwing accusations of “lying” around (1) would help the Tory cause, or (2) is particularly fair. Labour and the Lib Dems committed themselves to a referendum in good faith, circumstances changed, and they used the changed circumstances to wriggle not-very-convincingly out of their commitments.
Only one British party has sponsored rebellion against the British state, and it isn’t Labour or the Lib Dems.
24. Back to your playpen , its adult discussion we are looking for , not infantile dribbling.
122 Morus - you’re right - last week I got some 280/1 and then some 230/1 against there being a 2008 GE, but then sold a good part of it, cheap-skate that I am, to leave me in a small negative investment position.
There’s something vaguely satisfying about making money on Betfair, when you are actually being paid for placing a bet!
124. Nick Palmer changed his tune in one of his more recent posts. In any case if I was GB you have to look at the bigger picture rather than worry too much about nervous backbenchers in marginal seats. If you think to are going to be beaten regardless then yes hang on to June 2010. The scale of the defeat will undoubtedly be all the greater greater as accusations of clinging on to office for office’s sake (like Callaghan and Major did) really do resonate with the electorate. The great thing about an early election for Labour is it is they who seize the initiative - by Feb/March they will have served nearly 4 years so accusations of cutting and running can be dismissed) and there is clear blue water beween the policy positions of the two main parties. As time goes on this blue water will become muddied as events take over.
For Labour an early election will cause short term pain in terms of lost seats. However they can reasonably aim to remain the largest party or even end up with roughly the same no of seats as the Tories. At that point they could form an understanding with the Lib Dems in a NOC parliament that can carry them through the 2010/11 period then by 2012 they can fight an election in a feel good Olympic year with hopefully economic recovery well under way.
130 Obama advocated bombing Pakistan.
134 Ok we largely agree, While I use the term lying, I doubt Cameron would but he would certainly draw attention to the fact that both the Labour and the Lib Dems commited to a referrendum. The constitution was then called a treaty and both reneighed on their pledge. If for arguments sake in the next election Gordon then started saying there would be no new taxes, you would probably very legitimately ask what if you changed the name of tax to national insurance does that change the whole basis? the answer is no, and you may use the constitution as an example of how it has happened in the past (I appreciate there is a much better example in the past but you get the point).
Great Post!
139. Fair enough Voreas.
I don’t even think the Tories will have to do that: it looks like Darling is going to hang new taxes round Brown’s neck for the post-election period whether he likes it or not.
137 - Do you really think any party could win five election on the trot?
134: Labour committed themselves to a referendum with the intention of finding a way of breaking that commitment. That might not fit the classical definition of lying but it’s very close.
142 - The only way I can imagine it is if Labour squeak in this time, and that the Conservatives of the right decide to unseat Cameron in a particularly undignified blood-letting. Or if the Tory party splits into Cameroons and Hefferites. That would give Labour a fifth (albeit one or two in Coalition with LDs), but probably not a sixth.
119. I’m not saying that Paulson is bad or Geithner good, just at the way the DOW reacted in the last hour to Obama’s choice:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7743226.stm
Done it right this time
MORUS, You cant do better than to learn that greatest of card games; BRIDGE. If you have a good eye for patterns and a good memory you should do well, but be warned, once this game gets into your blood it can act as a drug. Lol
145 And bridge is that rare game where you can get your ass soundly whooped by a pair of octogenarian aunts!
146. Thats total nonsense.
141 I think this is a we will see moment. There is plenty of spin around by Labour, so much so that I think they are just trying to completely muddy the waters. Gordon’s ideal result is that he gives a substantial taxcut and somehow “proves” he doesn’t have to pay for it as he has ramped both tax cuts now and tax increases later, but people like kaletsky are also ramping the print money line. As always with Gordon the small print of the PBR will tell us whether there is any true tax cut and if thats the case there will be an even more substantial tax increase. If not I expect him to try and spin his ideal scenario, with proper analysis that should unravel in about ten minutes. The question is will we get proper analysis.
#79, I am obviously stupid…!
And sometimes inflation is a good thing compared to the alternative…
The BoE’s target rate is for 2% inflation not zero.
Surely real prices should reflect their market value, not the failure of the state to spend more on services than the value it procures are worth…? Am I missing somthink’…?
146 Isn’t bobajob into this sort of thing
certainly the whipping part.
142.
“Do you really think any party could win five election on the trot?”
The Communist party seems to have no trouble at all in China!
#135, if only I had your wit and intelligence….
24. Back to your playpen , its adult discussion we are looking for , not infantile dribbling.
by MalcolmG November 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
Please chose to debate the argument or ignore. Cat-cawling is for the gutter.
Mike and Morus can chose to censor. You are…?
142: The Tories came close to doing so in the 1950s/60s.
143.
“Labour committed themselves to a referendum with the intention of finding a way of breaking that commitment.”
Bit like Tories on identity cards iyam. They will sit back and wait for the time.
Strange! hated Europhile and champion of Euro membership, is now the only man who can save the Tories!
We can expect to see a lot of Ken Clarke over the next few days; the Tories know that he is still on of their most convincing voices on the economy. His interview in The Times today is helpful to the Tory cause. But it is worth noting that he breaks with the leadership in endorsing the idea of a stimulus package albeit one of a very different stripe from the one Brown and Darling are said to be planning, Clarke favours a temporary reduction in VAT to 15 percent.
From coffeehouse Blog.
Hugely entertaining article, Morus. Would be worthy of Jimmy the Greek!
I think politics is more like P0ker with Jokers though, with a clock ticking, the roof leaking, and your opponents capable of ganging up on you…
o/t The Rallings and Thrasher swingometer is now available for download.
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/Swingometer2.xls
153. They won the popular vote twice, in 1955 and 1959. The system handed them a narrow victory in 1951, despite losing the popular vote…
154: Not just a policy change?
153
Really, the 50/60’s three terms, almost a fourth! then nothing till 70!
154 but the difference is wage slave that Labour were forced into offering their pledge and then immeditely after the election broke it whereas you keep claiming this will happen with the tories but I see no evidence for it as they have been anti ID cards for at least 3 years.
#155, my Wessexian-friend, how you miss the news….
Apparently the new Anglo-Saxon hero is Our Boris!
Surely the electorate wouldn’t be impressed by a cynical snap election just because the polls are looking better? Especially since we’re meant to believe that Gordon doesn’t look at polls
160.
“they have been anti ID cards for at least 3 years.”
Not round my way, they’re not. We have PROPER Tories look you. None of those namby pamby metrosexuals. And as for those in London… Cahmereon is as trustworthy as Blair on a bad day.
156 - Cheers Rod!
I’m off out for a little while, so comments may be held in moderation for an hour or so.
If someone could keep an eye out for confirmation of Obama’s cabinet secretaries and post here, that would be good.
159: If the Tories had won in 1964 they would have faced the same small majority problem and may have won the next election. The only other way of doing it is Major winning in 1997, which would never have happened.
93 Love the article in the FT - rich with embellishment. In reality Brown begged to be allowed into the Eurozone summit. George Parker suggests they rolled out the red carpet. Someone’s having a laugh!
As noted in some of the posts above, a case can be made for Brown going to the country early (which I take to mean the period January - March 2009). However, it would be a considerable risk in that the economy would not have stabilised by then (and the initial stabilisation, when it comes, would be at a relatively low level of economic activity). So a campaign could be disrupted by another banking crisis*, requests for bail-outs of major companies, a run on the pound, a run on the stock exchange, major redundancy programmes… Harold Wilson was beaten by an apparently poor set of trade figures.
This makes me incline towards Autumn 2009, with a distinct possibility of Brown limping on until mid-2010.
*The measures taken by the Saviour of the World to recapitalise banks a few weeks ago appear to have been insufficient.
On the VAT tangent, I thought I’d post a couple of links because people often post confident-sounding statements about it here that turn out to be complete cack.
This explains how VAT works in the EU
http://www.economywatch.com/business-and-economy/rates.html
…and this explains how much money the EU gets and where it comes from (including VAT):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union
A classic example of the “complete cack” genre of EU-related pb.com commentary is Albion Til I Die’s post @103:
Note also that the whole reason for VAT existing is that it pays for the EU itself. So adjustments to VAT do not have an effect on short term domestic tax income (as it is paid to the EU)…
Obviously this claim sets alarm bells ringing because it would imply the EU having a totally immensely massive budget. Looking at the links I’ve posted, the real amount going to the EU appears to be something like 0.3% of VAT.
Interesting article in the Globe and Mail on Quebec’s election and the difficulties of interpreting elections.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081121.wcoessay1122/BNStory/specialComment/home
Previous thread -
URW, just seen your early hours comments on my GE Seats post last night. Although my short term betting in this market has been very profitable this year, I’m still holding a rather nasty 271 seat buy on Labour from way back, which I’d dearly like to sell. One of my reasons for buying more Labour seats last night, apart from their being good value IMHO,SHORT TERM, was to average out my price to 263 seats. I know one shouldn’t do this, but hopefully I’m now within spitting distance of being able to exit what is the only significant black mark for me in this year’s betting. My fault as I would normally set myself a 15 seat stop loss on this market
I feel the next 2 or 3 polls are likely to be really pivotal both in terms of the GE seats market and the timing of the GE - if we get beyond May/June next year, then it will be all the way to 4 June 2010 for sure. With this in mind, I’m keeping a close watch on Betfair’s Leader Leaving Market - Gordon Brown, where Q3 2010 looks tasty at 8/1 or better, although there’s only a few quids worth on offer.
152. If imbecile sounds better , your utter nonsense about England subsidising the celtic fringe , outs you as a BNP twat of the highest order and also shows that there is little point debating with you since you are obviously stupid or deluded or both.
early autumn 2009 looks like good timing for an election - the shape of the recession will be known by then - anything post winter that year will look like hanging on - election in late september or early october 2009 the conference season is cancelled releasing lots of activist time for the campaign- Gordon Brown gives the country an early Christmas present by resigning soon after losing - giving the county a much needed confidence boost - and anyone betting on Autumn 2009 for the election or GB to stand down will have an especially good christmas
171 ‘your utter nonsense about England subsidising the celtic fringe’
Have you considered that he might be right? Or is that too difficult to comprehend? We’ve just bailed out the Scottish banks - there is no way (an independent) Scotland could have done that alone. Where did the money come from? Oh let me guess - England.
167 “*The measures taken by the Saviour of the World to recapitalise banks a few weeks ago appear to have been insufficient.”
So far, only two loaves and a fish then….
The ‘Saviour of the World’ is done whatever happens on Monday. Quite simply, tax increases are inevitable, whenever, and that brings back in the frame the failure to fix the roof in the ‘good’ times. The Great British public is unforgiving.
The difference being that p0ker is a game played to win for an individual and politics is a belief in what is best for the country and millions of people. Anyone who does the former with the latter is pretty low and both labour supporters and those opposing them would react very negatively to anyone doing it.
The bottom line is that labour would lose even now, before the situation has started to filter into many voters pockets. His best p0ker chance might be now but to follow that would be the choice of someone who does not care about his party or the voters.
46, 47 Very interesting contributions in ecomomic and political terms. At least Ken is not pushing the minimalist Tory approach.
167. Reading between the lines, I would say you were terrified of Labour going to the polls in Q1 2009. Listen, you cannot use events as an excuse.
On that basis, let us say GB decided to wait until May or June 2010. And then in April there is an outbreak of bird flu, two major banks collapse and Israel bombs a nuclear installation in Iran.
Are you saying we should not have an election at that time, and the Governemnt should say that in extenuating circumstances, it has to pass emergency legislation allowing it to postpone until up to June 2011? Really!
134. Jack Peterson: Labour and the Lib Dems committed themselves to a referendum in good faith, circumstances changed, and they used the changed circumstances to wriggle not-very-convincingly out of their commitments.
Laughable.
If they had offered it in good faith, they wouldn’t have reneged.
173. Another one comes out from behind the white sheets. What an idiot, RBOS is a name only , you mororonic Little Englanders like to blame evrybody else but yourselves. Suppose Nat West had no part in RBOS , it was a big bas Scotsman that did it and ran away. Scotland has little part to play in the downfall of Team GB, if it had not registered in your moronic brain , it gets some pocket money from England and has no say whatsover what happens to UK policy , part from a small portion of cannon fodder Labour MP’s who vote as they are told to. The RBOS and other bank disasters were created in London, grow up and stop being the petty whinging Englishman that always blames it on some Johnny Foreigner.
179. Excuse spelling bas = bad, evrybody = everybody , message clear though.
179.
MalcolmG, that post says a lot more about you than the people you’re arguing with, I’m afraid.
179 I thought Gordon was blaming Johnny Foreigner, as you put it, for everything, namely America!
163
“Not round my way, they’re not. We have PROPER Tories look you.”
Read irrelevant Tories who led the party to defeats in 2001 and 2005.
Real Conservatives, which include Cameron, Clarke and Davis, are opposed to ID cards because they know they’ll be useless, infringe on civil rights and waste billions.
181. It says I do not like people trying to put the blame on other people rather than look in the mirror and honestly look at themselves. Trying to always blame someone else is not a nice trait.
Look, it’s pretty damn obvious what Brown is doing, he wants to scare people into voting for him next time. One of the biggest worries he has is that he can be outflanked by tax cuts from the opposition. Result, he forces them into having to go along with his planned tax rises that he is now attempting to hard wire into the next decade or so.
It is as disgusting a piece of politicking as I have ever seen, I hope it destroys him.
182. Brown is just useless, unfortunately he was born in Scotland so we get blamed for him.
185. May seem obvious but it is hard to believe that anybody could be stupid enough to be scared into voting for him, how could the Tories possibly make it any worse than the mess he has created. It just beggars belief.
116 For me, the recession began after Christmas, as people ceased buying or leasing properties. This was partly offset by an upturn in probate work. But, you’re right that the recession will affect people differently, and at different times.
Officially, the economy went into recession in June 1990, but the property market had been heading downwards for 18 months prior to that. After the Autumn of 1992, the volume of property work for solicitors was good, because although prices remained well below pre-crash levels, the number of transactions was very brisk. I expect that pattern will repeat itself in this recession.
173
Fred Goodwin -head of RBS - was Born a SCOT. And the RBS HO is is… Edinburgh. I believe Edinburgh is in England then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Goodwin
Apart from that fact and every third word you wrote ,your article was entirely unbaised and accurate..
Good to see the One Nation Tory tradition alive and well today!!
179 I think you should tone down the abuse.
16 etc. Coldstone. Your posts are always interesting - I wonder how you handle your own finances? Given that you are in debt beyond your means, I take it your solution would be 1) borrow a great deal more 2)spend the money on a new car and holiday in Spain 3) accept that the money must be repaid out of funds you may not have 4) those funds, if available, will be much lower anyway, as the tax rates will be higher.If you think that, if done by the state, this becomes more sensible, I suggest you (and many others) have a problem.
189
179 Malcom G
Sorry 189 should be directed to 179
176 I don’t believe Gordon Brown is the one playing the hand as regards economic action, he is the one running with the political strategy/tactics.
Bank bail out came from Standard Chartered working with the Treasury and it appears the delay in applying it was because Brown was unsure. Took Treasury briefs to helpful journalists to bounce him into action.
Now we have Treasury in full brief mode about next Monday, again to manage the expectations set by Brown. It looks like being Darling’s PBR rather than Brown’s. Darling is in the strongest position; if he resigned because he believed he was being pressured into economically harmful action then Brown would be gone. Brown can’t fire him for the same reason, Brown would be the loser.
Brown, Mandelson and Campbell aren’t “working all day at how to help people through the downturn”; they are working all day at how to ensure a political gain for Labour, but their success is on one last gamble.
The gamble is next Monday, the last shot to deflect a deep recession. We’ve had financial stabilisation (perhaps not effective), interest rate cuts, devaluation now we’ve got spending and tax cuts.
After that all that is left is an admission of failure and re-socialisation of the UK economy, fully nationalising banks, direct management of lending & of bad debts and price controls on certain goods and services, perhaps exchange controls if flight out of sterling becomes un-supportable.
“After that all that is left is an admission of failure and re-socialisation of the UK economy, fully nationalising banks, direct management of lending & of bad debts and price controls on certain goods and services, perhaps exchange controls if flight out of sterling becomes un-supportable.”
The frightening thing is I could see them doing that if it helped them through the next election, regardless of the damage it did to the economy.
“May seem obvious but it is hard to believe that anybody could be stupid enough to be scared into voting for him,”
Well I don’t think the MORI poll is accurate either but, if it is, then maybe they would.
193. Not bad getting 1 in 3 correct considering I was commenting on something was totally incorrect. Your geography is a bit dodgy. It should also be noted that it takes more than 1 person to run a company the size of RBOS, can you give us the make up of the board and senior executives that took all the major decisions, might be a bit more insightful. Bet you will find a fair mix in there, but then that would make your observation dubious. Nice also to know who was at fault for HBOS , NR, B&B , Barclays, Lloyds , all run from outside Scotland I believe , are they to be blamed on Scotland as well. At least Brown tried to pin it on someone far away.
184. MalcolmG: It says I do not like people trying to put the blame on other people rather than look in the mirror and honestly look at themselves.
It says much more than that. It marks you out as a bigot, I regret to say.
Amazing comments here. It is not a question of some dogmatic adherence to tax cuts and a narrow monetarist approach to borrowing that is at issue for the vast majority of the UK, and indeed, world public.
it is the urgent need to stimulate demand across ll economies to avoid a catastrophic slump. This needs gloabl co-ordiantion. Global solutions to a gloal problem.
Sadly the Tories still don’t get this. Of course that sense of despair is nothing to the danger of a Tory government coming into power with these minimalist policies advocated by a group with a provincial “country solicitor” mentality.
What we need is a global mindset, for global solutions. Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.
198. Your post marks you out as an idiot of the first order. Since you know nothing about me other than my retort to an idiot posting inaccurate facts, suggest you keep your sanctimonious balderdash to yourself. Ie get stuffed and keep your nose out unless you have something sensible to add.
185 It is as disgusting a piece of politicking as I have ever seen, I hope it destroys him.
I agree, the guy is absolutely obsessed with remaining in power, irrespective of the cost or consequences.
Oddly, it reminds me of a time when the late, great George Best was scythed down from behind after comprehensively beating his man.
George calmly got to his feet, collected the ball and handed it to his open-mouthed opponent with the words “If you really want it that much you’d better have it.”
199 - Seeing as you are coming here with a new name, trying to con us into believing you are someone different why the hell should we read or believe anything you write?
To do what you are doing shows that you are treating us as idiots, with your imagined superiority at having successfuly lied to us.
I don’t buy it, and other posters shouldn’t trust anything you say either.
Admit it, who were you?
Or are you a complete coward too as well as liar?
199 Gordon Brown is sadly our Prime Minister, by no strech of the imagination could he be called a global leader. The G20 meeting made that very clear. It achieved nothing and Gordo wasnt even mentioned. “Global leader” is delusional
199 - “Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.”
Quite…
“Amazing comments here. It is not a question of some dogmatic adherence to tax cuts and a narrow monetarist approach to borrowing that is at issue for the vast majority of the UK, and indeed, world public.”
Oddly enough, some of us don’t think that the government is able to borrow unlimited amounts of money; don’t want to saddle the voters with big tax increases in the medium term; and have little confidence in Gordon Brown’s abilities.
199 The “dogmatic adherence” as you call it is borrow and spend. It is unsustainable.
200. MalcolmG: Your post marks you out as an idiot of the first order.
I refer you to your 184 as quoted in my 198.
Describing your interlocutors as “idiots”, “mororonic Little Englanders”, having “moronic brains” and being “whinging Englishmen” is both bigoted and reprehensible. It cannot accurately be described as being “something sensible to add” to the discussion.
If you find this “sanctimonious balderdash”, I suggest you provoke no more of it - racist bigotry will always get similar responses, from others if not from me.
199. “What we need is a global mindset, for global solutions. Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.”
I seriously hope you are a Draper-bot. A gloal leader? LEADER OF THE WORLD? Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds? Don’t take us for fools please. It’s possible to put the Labour case intelligently,but you are wasting everyone’s time.
Morus,one of the best articles I have read on politics for a long time.
fantastic analysis, of a better quality than any broadsheet, well done Mike and the team for putting out such high quality product time and again.
on topic, the battle lines are drawn I think aleady for a spring election. at the moment Labour imho are setting the better narrative, just.
202. ukpaul:
I don’t think our astroturfer of the week is an old poster with a new name; the style is unlike anything I’ve seen before, certainly in the last six months or so.
It does look very much like a Gordon Brown speech.
207. It is only an eye for an eye, if people want to write bigoted twaddle they should expect the same in return, and not act like cry babies when they get it.
Darmstadtium, you are wrong and extreme!
This country is worse placed in the western world to deal with the failed economic policies of your master Gordon Brown. Labour will pay a shocking price at the next election. I will laugh very loud indeed if the next poll shows an increased Tory lead!
Labour have set the country up for a fall - the electorate is in shock. The moment an election is called the chickens are going to come home - mark my words. The words *Gordon Brown & Economic failure* have something in them that joins each at the Hip, to use Mandelson’s new position with Brown!
202. Well, your personal attack sums up your inability to make an argument. cogito, ergo sum. I am new here and am not reincarnated or have I metamorphosed from some imagined “anti-Tory devil” that appears to have infected your paranoid imagination:):)
199. Ok. You are a wind-up merchant. Admit it, you’re a Tory:
“a provincial “country solicitor” mentality”
Darling was a provincial solicitor, as you must know. You are a Tory troll, and I claim my 5 Gordon Brown Pesos.
208. Same applies to you too! No argument so you try to rubbish, but that is no substance:)
199. What we need is a global mindset, for global solutions. Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.
Next week, How to nail jelly to the ceiling.
210 - They admitted they are someone with a new name on a previous thread.
I think it’s 50/50 whether they are posting what they believe or are trolling instead. The view of Brown as a global phenomenon, the short phrases invoking an opinion as fact, and so on are something that I’ve seen before, at the moment I tend to think they are a troll.
211.
MalcolmG, that’s simply a pathetic argument. I’m sure you can do better.
You appear to have been riled by the original comment “England is being brought-down by the subsidised existance of the Celtic-fringe” (Fluffy Thoughts at 24). That argument may or may not be correct, but it is certainly unworthy of the disproportionate response you’ve thrown at it and subsequent posters who have dared engage you in conversation.
217. ukpaul: They admitted they are someone with a new name on a previous thread.
Really? I missed that. It’s also contradicted by his 213.
Any reason why a recent post of mine not have appeared?
Is there some some of spam filter that I may have fallen foul of?
130. No president could ever turn america into a european style state. The constitution and federal system makes it impossible. The people would not re-elect any president that tried and the people could never be europeans.
The world would be a much poorer place if America changed and didn’t remain a unique, fascinating and extreme country.
Barack Obama will not turn the country into some muslim-marxist failed utopia, he’ll probably move it slightly to the left.
Very nice article, Morus, and a fascinating insight into p0ker.
I’ve tried the game a few times and never got the bug - but I know some very good players, indeed I know a couple of semi-professionals, including one girl who has made half a million quid. They are all extremely intelligent.
However, your analogy has a serious flaw or two. For instance, you talk of bluffing your opponent so that he folds, but this doesn’t actually happen in elections, does it?
i.e. if Brown talks the talk, cultivates his swagger, and boldly stakes all on a March election, Cameron isn’t going to get all wobbly at the knees, throw his cards on the baize and head for the alleyway outside the gambl1ng club in a fit of tears, is he?
No, he’s gonna fight the election. So there are no real “bluffs” in
politics - there are “feints”. It’s more like rugby in that way. (and Brown is a rugby player).
Put it this way. Last October Brown the flanker tried to sell Cameron the fullback a dummy pass, a feint, hoping to throw the Tory off his stride by pretending to go for an election. But Cameron didn’t buy the feint, he stood his ground, partly cause he was the only man in defence and had no choice.
Meanwhile Brown sold the dummy pass so well he lost his footing in the mud and was nearly forced to give up the ball anyway: in the end he was obliged to go to ground, where a nasty ruck ensued, forcing his team about thirty yards back down the pitch the other way.
There, that’s a better analogy. And it’s from a sport I understand!
What next? To continue the rugby theme. We’re in the last third of the match. The Tories were 15 points ahead and cruising to victory, but a couple of clever penalties and drop goals have brought Labour back into the game.
And now it’s started raining, very heavily, so anything could happen. The grizzled old Labour team are grinding towards the Tory line. But one serious slip and the ball goes to that gifted Tory fullback, who might streak up the pitch for a game-sealing try.
213. The only thing that is global about Gordon Brown is the knowledge that he is a joke.
If you believe that Brown is a world leader then your ability obviously lies soley in Science. Brown is an international leightweight, the more experienced and heavy weight leaders such as Merkel, Sarkozy, Berlosconi don’t seem to share the view that he is some sort of giant. Brown is a joke!
Indeed Brown’s ‘No time for a novice’ seems apt for Brown as you don’t go round saying the economic problem has come from the states, when it is worse here. Indeed Brown intervened in elections by backing Obama to gain some of the credit. Funny that Obama seems to stay firmly away from the pygmy Brown. In my opinion Brown is the mini-me sized politician on the world stage at the moment. He has no mandate, poor communication skills and very bad judgement in matters of diplomacy and international relations.
Brown = Null Point!
219 - “317. I have not heard of Gabble, though I may have met him in a previous life, before metamorphosis!
by Darmstadtium November 21st, 2008 at 6:57 pm”
Don’t be taken in by a liar.
220. Yes Penny, you must have said that the Tories have the right solutions to solving the world economic problems and that global leaders were knocking on Cameron’s door asking if Ozzie can be gioven a secondment
220. Penny4Them: Is there some some of spam filter that I may have fallen foul of?
Indeed there is. There’s a list of naughty words that junks posts immediately (without even sending them to the moderation queue). I suspect that list may not be complete any more, but Mike, Morus or Double Carpet could confirm.
I should have said this first;
I love the article Morus, great writing, great insight.
221: Obama, like Brown, just wants power and is willing to say anything to win it, and ignore those that supported him to keep it.
225: If Gordon is so good why did he let the British banking system get into such a mess?
200. Quite likely. For instance, you can only spell p.o.k.e.r as p0ker!
You’ll get the hang of it eventually. Always copy your post before pressing Submit.
[right-click, select all; right-click, copy]
220 - The word p0ker (spelled correctly) may well be the problem, given the nature of the thread. Another one which took me ages to work out was gener1c.
226. OK.. thank you. I still have a copy of my post. I will go through it and see if I can spot the offending word or phrase.. and readjust.
224. My goodness, ukpaul, you record my comments. Well, I am sure your masters at Tory HQ will be very impressed with how you use your supposedly valuable time
Try to lighten up, and be seriosu on what really matters: economic stimulus……..global leadership…..
225. I didn’t see global leaders knocking on Brown’s door either. Brown has a credit problem - nothing to do with him screwing up the economy: It is the fact he is obsessed with taking the credit!
I think that the rejuvination of mandelson is a proxy sign by Brown that he is trying to confront the graveyard of his past. In phychological terms the constant need for reasurance and taking the credit and forgoing the blame is a sign of emotional insecurity.
224.
Good spot, ukpaul. I’ve mostly been ignoring him since spotting his first post as a blatant astroturf (so much so that I was surprised it was let through moderation).
233. spoken from personal experience, perchance?
226 Ah, that explains why one of my earlier posts failed to get through as it included the word p*ker.
Splendid article Morus, I may be a bit of a lightweight when it comes to in-depth political and economic debate, but your lead article is talking my kind of language!!
You are, I believe, quite right to allude to the fact that 2010 is the worst possible option for “Brown the p0ker player”.
If he risks all on being dealt a winning hand on that final hand, he knows that the first three cards his opponent will be dealt on that hand are AKQ of Spades. He will have the accusation of clinging on to power as long as possible thrown at him, he will have to go into such an election promising large tax rises and he will also go into such an election against a likely backdrop of 3 million unemployed and at least a year of misery fresh in the minds of the electorate.
Using your p0ker playing analogy, 2010 is by far the very worst option for any gambling man.
However, for those still intent on sticking by their original bets and keeping their money on 2010, they do have one or two things still in their favour.
1. Brown is NOT a gambler.
2. That Brown is not receiving advice from those around him, who ARE gamblers.
Point one is conceded, although some would say he has been quite happy to gamble, like a drunk in a Las Vegas casino, with the country’s economic future for the past eleven years.. but of course, it is easy to gamble when the money you are gambling with is not your own.. ask Nick Leeson.
However, it is point two that leaves me convinced that betting on a 2010 election is a no-brainer. Mandelson and Campbell will inevitably have some input, if not the final word on the date of the next election. They don’t need to read your excellent article to know that the odds would be more highly stacked against Labour in that final hand of 2010, than in any of the other options.
Yay!!
Finally got it through.
(Probably not worth reading though)
235. No, I am happy to leave others to take the credit!
Brown =
Suggested opening line for Osborne on Monday: “I would like to congratulate the Chancellor on how well he read out the Prime Minister’s Pre Budget Report”…
Please don’t stop Darmstadtium from posting. Stuff like this is priceless:
“What we need is a global mindset, for global solutions. Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.
by Darmstadtium November 22nd, 2008 at 12:49 pm”
He seems to think posting arse-numbing garbage like this will actually impress people. Not only that, he seems to think it will actually impress the astute and forensic intellects of the pb commentariat.
Yeah, right.
What he is doing with his noisome spinnage, of course, is the opposite of his intention: he is just reminding everyone what a tedious bunch of ineffable twats go under the name New Labour. As such he is the best possible advert for a change of government.
Long may he prosper.
179 ‘it gets some pocket money from England and has no say whatsover what happens to UK policy ,’
Nonsense - money is shipped North of the border from further South. Scottish MPs are in the dominance in UK government - look at the Cabinet. RBS and HBOS were bought down by poor Scottish management. Sorry mate.
241 - Darmstadtium and Gabble are two cheeks of the same ar$e
226 - naughty words?
These?
cardura
online poker
avapro
online slots
online casino
party poker …
232 - And that proves it, you feel the need to call someone you know as being a lib dem a tory, that reduces it to a possible handful as you both clearly know me and know how to advance your trolling by ensuring that I will rip into your for deliberately lying.
I know your game and you know I’m onto you. I thought you might be a tory troll posting deliberate exaggerations but it looks like you may be a labour poster after all. Nice of you to make it clearer so quickly.
I do enjoy hounding people like you, I don’t like liars. Maybe you should try and change your name again to escape.
If you are a tory troll the same goes to you, although at least you the following doesn’t apply to you.
If it does, for your thick little skill, I was posting about tax rises upthread, better than your pathetic little husk of a party is wanting. You aren’t a left wing party anymore you are just a disgusting collection of self interested technocrats who use the working class to get your own end.
There might be a glimmer of shame somewhere in you, as you try to paint those to the left of you as not being so, maybe you are ashamed of what you have become in being further to the right than the tories you used to hate, maybe that shame will eventually lead you to enlightenment but I’m not betting on it.
244 - Show off.
243. I see Gabble was nicely humiliated on the last thread - caught telling a blatant lie. He was trying to ascribe a quote about Polly Toynbee to David Cameron, when in fact it was made by a different Tory.
Proven liar. And well-known Labourite. What a surprise.
244. alex.
I know how you did that. You should have mixed in some bolds for variety…
Superb article Morus and rightly worthy of all the plaudits.
Perhaps a hat tip is due to Flockers who deveoped the same theme in an excellent post last September.
125.
“Gordon sits, brooding at the final table.
This is a “high stakes” moment. He’s not quite all-in but he’s short stacked and it’s still early days in the tournament. In recent rounds he’s collected some easy chips from political non-entities who’ve gone all-in on seven high off-suit. Gordon reflects on this: “what did they think they were doing?” Did they think I’d completely lost it?”. He couldn’t shake the suspicion that it was part of a plot involving at least one of the big guns around the table, designed to destabilise him. And - damn - it was working. He was thinking about the termerity of their challenge and not the hand he had to play.
Where was he? That’s right. Manchester. The Conference. The Final Table. Big Crowds. Focus. People are staring at him - it must be his turn to play. He’s on the button. Harman’s to his left, looking pretty flush. She’s made a smallish bet. Middling pair, he thinks dismissively. Miliband’s next along. He has raised. Brown squints at him through the fug. Aye, he’s a plotter alright. Has the face for it. Suspiciously big pile of chips too. He’s been accumulating. Lost that big game in Russia though, didn’t he. Hmmm. The next chair’s empty. Where’s Johnson? Aah, he’s knocked his stack onto the floor. Brown raises his eyes skyward. Straw’s next. He’ll have folded. What’s this? He’s called! So has Hutton - aye that was expected. Cruddas has called too. Can’t work out his game. Need to watch him. Blears is fiddling with her chips. She looks like she is planning a big move. Hmmm. We’ll deal with that when it happens.
Seven faces stare at Gordon intently. Decision time. The clock seems to have leapt forward fifteen minutes. Does nothing work around here without me? Gordon beckons Balls over. “Promise the people working clocks” he says. Balls looks at Gordon bewildered, pats him on the shoulder and walks away. Gordon looks again at his cards. Jack seven off suit. Decision time. His hand trembles.”
by Flockers September 23rd, 2008 at 9:52 am
245. ukpaul: you feel the need to call someone you know as being a lib dem a tory, that reduces it to a possible handful
Actually, it’s standard partisan Labourite thinking. As the LibDems have consistently backed Labour over the Tories, anyone anti-Labour must, by their thinking, be a Tory.
Disaster for the French Socialists (following article is in French):
http://tf1.lci.fr/infos/france/politique/0,,4168331,00-vers-une-fracture-durable-.html
Aubry beat Royal in the Socialist Party leadership election by only 42 votes out of 137,116 votes cast. Royal had already made it known that she believed she was being ganged up on by other forces in the PS and hinted she might leave the party and create her own political formation if she was screwed out of her chance to lead the party. Now Royal is claiming “irregularities” in the vote and demanding a do-over.
I notice that many Tory supporters here attack Browns personality and likeability.I’m sure they have a point.
What,however, they ignore, is that the polls show that although the voters quite like Cameron, they regard him as a lightweight.
That is bound to impact more when the economy is in trouble.
O/T
Herbert’s choice for today
(Arsenal have to be the nap)!!
Man C v Arsenal - Arsenal win @ 5/4
Stoke v West Brom - Stoke win @ 6/5
Burnley v Doncaster - Burnley win @ 8/13
Crewe v Stockport - Stockport win @ 13/8
The economy
I do not think the following from the Guardian forms the right kind of backdrop for an election.
30,000 jobs at risk as Woolworths teeters on the brink•
Bankers thwart management plan to rescue ailing chain
• Collapse of MK One brings more gloom to high street
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/nov/22/woolworths-retail-mk-one
Perhaps the bankers will be told to keep it going, and lose more money and have to ask the taxpayer for more…(as in Britsh leyland?)
As for talk of “solving the world’s economic problem!!!
No one can solve it.
Ameliorate ? yes
Stop? No.
252. No it is the difference between Power and opposition.
Brown acts very unstatesman like when he takes national decsions on a party basis to shore him up shor-term.
24.*Anything* but Fluffy thoughts.
“But, as Mike often points out, the Tories are doing better in the marginals. Scotland could vote for nEU-Labour all it likes; unfortunately it’s a minor issue that should not, and will not, effect the choice of the English majority.
Anyone know the current price of Brent-crude…?”
Which part of the country relies on a healthy Oil and Gas industry, the tax revenue has helped the Treasury out over the last 30 years when money has been extremely tight?? I will give you a clue, they wear kilts at weddings!
253 Thanks Herbert, if only for lightening the mood, it’s been a little heavy man for the past 45 minutes.
250 - But, having posted nothing but attacks on labour from the left recently (either as a democrat supporter or in suggesting tax rises for high earners) any new poster could not logically say that about me. Maybe it arose because I supported fox hunting, but then again, so did half of the lib dem MPs, or because I suggested that I would trust Cameron much more than labour with civil liberties, the issue which tends to decide my vote. I doubt many tories would like my foreign policy views on things such as the middle east or, indeed, my response to Russia/Georgia.
As such they must be an old poster who tried to resurrect an old battle, one that they know I will return with vigour.
257 -
“Man C v Arsenal - Arsenal win @ 5/4″
Lightening the mood? Not for a Man City supporter.
O/T Did anyone have a successful punt on New Zealand to win the rugby this morning?
243.
“Darmstadtium and Gabble are two cheeks of the same ar$e”
like Martin Day and ‘Ave it?
229 Rod - thanks for that bit of techie wizardry, I’ve always highlighted the particular text and was unaware of the select all option, which incidentally doesn’t appear to be available on Google Chrome.
241. thanks for the generous offer to continue, which I will take up with relish. Clearly, your reactonary Tory colleagues are able to resistthe knee-jerk personal attacks, and instead focus on the serious substantive policy issues which the country now faces.
Policy issues which Cameron the flyweight has clearly been unable to address, while his sidekick Gideon drives the Tories down a cul-de-sac of minimalist and inadequate responses for the serious situation before us all.
245. How sad, how very sad. Anwyay, who are you?
247. I haven’t a clue what you are talking about (but the tenor suggests you don’t have much of value to contribute at these difficult times)
261. Better to be an arse than a Dick Head Wage Sleave!
259 Oops, sorry ukpaul!
261. No. Martin Day, ‘Ave It, Maggie Tatcher Fan, Voreas, Weathercock, Al Fresco etc. Are noble believers in conservative ideology.
Darmstadtium and Gabble are evil Labour trolls.
Remember a few days ago how Tories here glowed over a Sun editorial condemning borrowing to reflate the economy. Here’s the Sun editorial today, notably more equivocal - scenting a change in the wind?
GORDON Brown acts swiftly to rule out an election next year.
Good. We need Mr Brown to be concentrating 100 per cent on getting us out of the mire.
Monday’s Commons announcement by the Chancellor will be crucial.
Alistair Darling wants to give us more money so we can keep the shops in business and stave off a serious slump.
But if he borrows to pay for it without making savings elsewhere, tax will have to rise and the Pound could suffer.
Faced with these massive challenges, an election is not high on the list of priorities.
——-
Incidentally, it’s really hard to find the editorials on the Sun website. Somehow you don’t get the impression that they think they’re what their readers are looking for… The layout is truly awful, with stories tripping over each other. In particular, their picture of their lorry with a slogan about Baby P appears in the same red frame to have as a caption “Crude, lewd, rude and very very very funny”, which obviously must relate to something else on the site - if David Roe is reading this, he might like to get it fixed?
263 - I’m not a liar and I’m not a coward. You, however…
You really think you can hoodwink people don’t you? You don’t even realise how transparent you are.
266 - Gabble may be seen as deluded by some but at least he seems honest.
Gordon Brown admits he was wrong to claim he had ended ‘boom and bust:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/3497533/Gordon-Brown-admits-he-was-wrong-to-claim-he-had-ended-boom-and-bust.html
Surely Brown should resign, many have lost their job due to this recession the fruit of Brown’s unwise policies! Now Brown has admited he should not of said ‘No more Boom and Bust’ - he has admited that his spending plans for the economy were wrong.
Brown should resign!
“What we need is a global mindset, for global solutions. Only a global leader, such as Gordon Brown can do this.”
The most terrifying thing is that Darmstadtium expects us to believe he writes this on his own…
PS — wage slave, why don’t you just admit you support ID cards and be done with it instead of hiding behind all this “Well, all the Tories *I* know…”
268. cool it, boy. Go into a dark room, and reflect calmly…….;)
254.”I do not think the following from the Guardian forms the right kind of backdrop for an election.”
Another problem at this time of the year, weather!
We have had heavy snow for the last 48 hours, and the roads are not great.
A weather pattern that has developed over the last 3/4 years would also make things difficult. We are getting the snow and freezing temperatures from around the end of November through to January.
“Gabble may be seen as deluded by some but at least he seems honest.”
Oh, “There has been no boom and there will be no bust” is honest, is it?!
272 - Stop trolling. It’s the least you can do if you can’t be honest with us.
There isn’t an ounce of sincerity in anything you’ve posted.
264.
“Better to be an arse than a Dick Head
A dick head may go places where it encountereth pleasure, whereas an ar$e is just an ar$e (even if it is a Tory ar$e).
A bacteriologist might also consider your ranking to be rank.
274 - Well I believe he believes it, even if I don’t share that belief.
272
Thats what you should be doing.
263. The reference about lying was to Gabble, not you, you repulsive outbreak of herpes.
But do please carry on. We need more proven lefty liars like Gabble, and more repugnant lefty idiots such as yourself - so we can unmask the Lizard of Fibs that is New Labour.
264.
believers in conservative ideology.
that’s the tooth fairy’s big brother?
274.
“There has been no boom and there will be no bust”
I thought that was describing a night with Hazel Blears?
269. ukpaul
I thought you were accusing Darmstadtium of being me in disguise.
I’m not Darmstadtium, by the way. He seems to lack my implacable and irrational hatred of the tories. However, in all other respects, I find it hard to disagree with anything he says.
It’s like being inside a madman’s brain this afternoon. Maybe because there was no early kick-off.
269. Gabble - honest???
Gabble was caught telling a blatant lie about Cameron on the last thread. Go check. He is a liar. He even admitted it, when confronted with the evidence. His explanation - “I got carried away”.
Yeah, right. That’s what Stalin said about the Great Terror. “I only meant to annoy Trotsky with a whoopee cushion. I must have got carried away.”
Labour = Lies. Labourites = Liars. That’s what they do. They Lie. It’s all they can do: Lie. Expecting them not to lie is like expecting babies to stop filling nappies.
Labourites Are Liars.
Hazel Blears always reminds me of Les Dawson when he dressed up as a woman!
“Well I believe he believes it…”
Like the saying goes, it’s only the insane who never doubt their certitude…
Look here Hazel Blears was obviously seperated at birth:
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2007/03/12/lesdawson460.jpg
284 - There’s a difference between people who believe what they are saying and people who say it for effect. Gabble is the former, our troll friend is the latter.
284.
“Expecting them not to lie is like expecting babies to stop filling nappies.”
A bit like expecting most Tory MEPs to fill in honest expense forms? And whatever did happen to that ‘nice’ fragrant Mrs Spelman, whose nanny goat was so gruff?
251- According to Le Figaro, Royal has said she will contest the party leadership vote “by every means” available, and is ready to take the fight to the courts in order to not allow the party leadership to be “stolen” from her.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/2008/11/22/01002-20081122ARTFIG00475-pour-le-camp-de-royal-aubry-n-a-pas-gagne-.php
As if the French Socialists weren’t already badly divided…
275.”272 - Stop trolling. It’s the least you can do if you can’t be honest with us.
There isn’t an ounce of sincerity in anything you’ve posted.”
UK paul, I don’t think that this troll is either Labour or Tory, but there is something familiar about him…. Ignore him, he feeds off this type of reaction.
287.
You cad sir! You have placed on this site a photo of a not-so-well-known Tory parliamentary candidate. Only gallantry forbids me from naming her.
“I find it hard to disagree with anything he says.”
I find it hard to *believe* anything *you* say, Mr “There has been no boom and there will be no bust”.
288. No, Gabble is a liar. What’s more, he’s a boring and unintelligent liar. He’s not even funny or insightful. He contributes nothing to the site apart from making himself look like a total knob and reminding everyone else why New Labour suck.
I hope he posts much more.
292.
253. Herbert Proper Snr.
Oh, sh!t. Our record is appalling when I am aware that people have tipped us - and you tip us in a CHESHIRE DERBY??? Damn you!
Morus - well done, your best piece yet, beautifully crafted to include the political and betting aspects in equal measure.
I happen to disagree with you on one key aspect however - I see the polls moving viciously against Brown early in the New Year, never to return and he will therefore be forced to do the inevitable - hang on until the very end in May or June 2010.
IMO his best time to have called a GE, after the Oct 2007 fiasco, would have been in mid Oct-mid Nov 2008, but that window of opportunity has now gone.
The only other possible route leading to a 2009 GE, would be if Brown is turfed out of office in June next year, a course of events considered quite feasible by the all-knowing PtP btw, although he doesn’t subscribe to the second part of the scenario, whereby Brown’s successor calls a GE more or less immediately thereafter.
290. “take the fight to the courts”
I bet they surrender.
267 Au Contraire Palmer of Westminster parish, The Sun editorial is clerly stating that Darling needs to cut back on public expenditure to balance the books and protect the pound/ameliorate tax rises in the future - its is a tacit promotion of the Tory position - that the 2010/2011 spending plans are unsustainable.
Tory position - monetary stimulus and targetted tax breaks/cuts fully funded to protect against future tax rises, now supported by probably cuts in public expenditure to provide further tax breaks.
This thread is getting really subtle and informative…
290. S&S: Royal has said she [...] is ready to take the fight to the courts in order to not allow the party leadership to be “stolen” from her.
French socialists taking a leaf from the book of, of all people, George Bush!
300 relates to the posts before 294, not to Dyed’s comment. I don’t agree - I think the editorial is ambiguous, and intended to be so, whereas the earlier one was quite explicit.
It’s all a bit bad tempered on here this afternoon, what a pity given that the article that kicked it off was so good.
Some of our loyal brownite leftie contributors may well beleiev evey word they type - it’s mostly what Gordo has been saying and as loyal acolytes they are simply supporting him. Somewhere around a third of the electorate clearly agree enough to intend voting him back for a fourth term, so Gabble, Wage Slave and Darmstadtium can’t be completely wrong.
302 then we must agree to disagree - but thank you for ensuring no-one was under the delusion my post was either subtle, or informative!
The definition of a troll is someone who posts to provoke an emotive response or disrupt the thread.
Darmstadtium posts Labour spin, not backed up by anything other than assertion - something we all do at one time or another for our particular positions but generally with some engagement with opposing views. Not sure that the accusation of trolling stands, could just be he/she is unable to understand opposing views or is posting to try to affect in some way readers views - IMHO he/she just adds no knowledge to the game of working out where and how the chances of various parties might change, long and short term sentiment, risks and opportunities.
UK Paul - your reaction creates the disruption a troll would want, irrespective of what Darmstadtium’s motives are. He/she doesn’t want to argue the case, just post the assertion. Ignore if it annoys you.
On the PS, my source in France says it’s the age old problem. They simply don’t have a leader. There are merely factions of people who could be leader.
Which seems about right.
300- And there isn’t even an election on the horizon. Imagine what it will be like on PB in two or three months when Labour is five points ahead in the polls and Brown calls a snap election!
301- Just what we need to add to the current cameraderie on PB: a 2000 presidential election debate…
302 How is it ambiguous? I think DYED has got this right, effectively the sun are saying Tax cuts need to be funded or else there could be a run on the pound. Isn’t that the tory line, or is someone spinning that as Labour’s line now(it would be just like Gordon to cover every single angle just in case).
297. Peter. If you think the polls will move viciously against Brown early in the New Year then wouldn’t it be better to hold onto your Labour SELL positions?
Re PtP’s views. I think the chances of Brown being turfed out before the GE have receded enormously.
On today’s sport, I have a free £10 bet courtesy of totesport. It has gone on Villa to beat Man Utd 2-1, with first goal scorer Agbonlahor. Odds 75/1.
Why do we suddenly have a crap rugby team?
It will be interesting to see whether the Tories put down a censure motion next week - they need to be able demonstate a great divide, clearly and credibly setting out how their policy differs from that of the Government.
Otherwise they are at risk of being accused of simply not having any such policy. It would also provide an opportunity to see how the LibDems would vote on such a motion.
288. I believe we need Gordon Brown to steer the country through these exceptionally difficult times. I believe it would be a tragedy, no, a disaster if Cameron, Osborne & co. were ever to get into power, because they would stall our economy and cause it to go into a depression death spiral with their policies.
I believe Cameron’s Tories would savagely cut programmes which give children a great start in life, such as Sure Start, in order to meet the mantra of “funded cuts”. I think they have no understanding of how serious a situation the world economy faces.
Cameron only gives the impression that he cares for our public services but in reality he would take a knife to them to pacify his right wing wolves, hyenas and Hurray-Henrys on the back benches.
In truth, Cameron is a chimera of these back benchers and is consistent only in his inconsistency.
Britain cannot afford such a leader at any time and certainly not now! I believe the British people know this tobe true and will show this when the time comes!
Cipriani must go.
311 How does a censure motion work?
312.
If you believe all that, Darmstadtium, then you’re deluded.
BTW, anyone who uses the phrase “through these difficult times” is automatically a joke.
311 I mean in the technical sense!
Intersting that the Tories are accused of not appreciating the gravity of the situation - I’d say its Labour who are in denial - if things are as bleak as being suggested, tinkering with the tax position of the lowest income brackets isn’t going to stimulate one of those women with permanent arousal syndrome, let alone the economy and will destroy our finances for a decade.
It is simoly not worth the long term pain to risk everthing to see if the recession is shallow or not.
Brown is in charge of the Titanic, he has seen the iceberg late and he is trying to steer round it - he should plough straight in, its the only way he will stay afloat. Balance the books, ballast the boat.
309 stjohn - but I already have sell bets on Labour, I simply feel uncomfortable with my buy bet at 271 seats and am hoping to exit from this, loss free, at or around the year end.
As regards the prospects of Brown being removed next June, I wouldn’t be so sure that this won’t happen - forget his current bounce and concentrate instead on 100,000+ jobs a month disappearing between now and then.
Good luck to the Villa this afternoon. I fancy them a bit, but not a lot!
309.”Re PtP’s views. I think the chances of Brown being turfed out before the GE have receded enormously.”
I think that the chances of Brown standing down have increase in the longer term, and that is very much *him* standing down rather than being turfed out.
He has staked everything on *his* ability to fix this recession in the UK and Globally.
319.*increased*
310. It’s generational. I have a theory about this. All the coaching stuff is mostly rubbish. Every so often a country produces a lot of great players at the same time and they dominate: West Indies in the ’80s, England rugby a few years back, Australia’s cricket team after ‘90 ish.
319.And if Brown becomes a huge liability again, watch Mandelson, he is grooming Purnell for the job.
312 We need Darmstadtium on this site he is priceless.
“depression death spiral”
“his right wing wolves, hyenas and Hurray-Henrys on the back benches.”
Seriously, his character adds if not to the debate then certainly to the language.
is that phrased as you intended?
322. Purnell would be a terrible choice: lightweight, party insider, spiv-ish.
321. But English rugby has more money and more players and more resources than any other country. We certainly shouldn’t lose with such monotonous regularity to Southern Hemisphere countries, let alone Wales! (World Cups excepted).
There IS something wrong with our coaching. And a great coach really CAN make a difference. Look what Capello has done for English soccer.
The talent was there, it just needed organising and inspiring. Surely the same goes for rugby, with all the talent at our disposal.
“English soccer”
Soccer?!?
You’re clearly spending too much time out of the country…
318. Peter. Sorry I misunderstood. I did read your recent pieces here mind. But all this time I still thought your net position was to SELL Labour.
322. ChristinaD. Interesting. What is the evidence for Purnell being the favoured one?
324 possibly should have said he added to the vocabulary or phraseology, either way, I think he is quite funny.
329 - I think the reference might have been to Mandelson ‘grooming’ Purnell from the post previous to yours.
329 i was referring to 322
327. “Soccer” is a perfectly acceptable English word, deriving from British University slang of the 1890s, when the suffix -er was added to many words.
Soccer comes from AsSOCiation Football - hence “soccer”. “Rugger” from rugby is more obvious.
My favourite example of this kind of slang is “waste paper basket” which apparently becomes “wagger pagger bagger”.
326. seanT: Look what Capello has done for English [football]
Thus far, not much more (if any more) than Eriksson managed.
I would submit that there is little difference between an average coach and a “great” coach, whereas there’s a massive difference between an average coach and a poor coach (e.g. McClaren).
442. That was over 100 years ago now. These days it’s only used by the rugby fan, the ignorant and the foreign. And those on a wind-up, I suppose.
442 = 332, obviously.
333. I was comparing Capello with his immediate predecessor, Mclaren - and that’s the only fair comparison, seeing as they had virtually the same resources (Eriksson had Beckham in his prime).
The results achieved by Capello speak for themselves.
Anyway England are playing appallingly today. Tedious, slow and inept.
336. seanT.
It’s an unfair comparison, because McClaren was demonstrably bad. Compared with a bad coach, all coaches that are at least average look like geniuses.
Beckham, even in his prime, was decidedly overrated.
328.stjohn, watching the Mandelson media spin about the post offices and Purnell’s raising his profile a bit in the media.
The Guardian was fascinating not that long ago.
324.MTF, on a political betting site?
I cannot believe that anyone would misunderstand my meaning, especially when we think of how central Mandelson was to Blair getting the ultimate Labour party job, rather than the previous rising Labour star that was Gordon Brown.
337. Well then you agree with my thesis: coaching makes a difference, which is where the argument began with thomas - who denied that coaching makes any real difference at all.
Whether Capello is a genius or McLaren was just a moron( I agree this is still unproven, though Capello has certainly injected confidence very quickly) makes no odds for this argument: coaching DOES matter.
And English rugby is looking very badly coached right now. Pathetic display against the Boks. Tsk.
This is surreal.
The lead post in this thread was rightly hailed as one of hte greatest lead articles of all time on this website.
Since then, the thread has degenerated into people rising to the bait offered by Darmstadtium .. and the last dozen or so posts has veered off into rugby and football.
Not complaining.. just passing comment
Here is a privileged inside account of the negotiations/discussions between Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling prior to Monday’s pre-budget report.
http://tinyurl.com/6rhx63
339. seant: Well then you agree with my thesis: coaching makes a difference
As I explained in my 333.
339. I think coaching can add a bit, but not enough to produce a great side. McClaren was/ is an idiot. He didn’t even have basic coaching skills. Even I know you don’t indulge your players like naughty kids. If I was coaching the England footer team they’d have improved.
I think there may be a discipline problem with England rugby now if the article in the Guardian about Cipriani et al is true.
Let’s see what happens with the football, they just narrowly beat Germany in a friendly. Big deal. It says something about our low standards in that game that qualifying well for a tournament is seen as a success.
Harfleur speech = great.
312 Whichever party is in power will have to cut public spending plans at some stage in order to prevent a collapse in confidence in the UK economy. The Conservatives understand this. And Labour? Well, we’ll see on Monday, both in Darling’s statement and reactions to it.
It’s not the coaching. It’s basic mistakes and poor decision making.
342. Fair enough - I didn’t see the subtlety of your point - and indeed I think you may be right. There are crap coaches (McLaren), and decent coaches (Eriksson) and the difference between them can be enormous.
Do great coaches even exist? Or are they just decent coaches blessed with great players? It’s an interesting argument. I’d say Brian Clough may be a very rare example of a great coach - who could turn fairly mediocre players into a triumphant team.
343. Well, just qualifying was beyond us with McLaren. I think with a decent or even great coach (see above) England have the talent to win the World Cup, with a nice dose of injury-free luck.
343 - who says that just qualifying for a major tournament is a success???
Not qualifying is a disastrous failure, qualifying is a minimum requirement.
I look forward, however, to the first person attempting to argue that Capello is anything other than a top rank coach/manager.
Yours is a great article, Morus. Not just substantively interesting but also fun to read. Looking back at what a “disaster” it supposedly would have been had Brown called the early election in October/November 2007 and lost half his majority, one can only marvel as how events change one’s perspective. I was never quite sure why is would have been so awful for Brown or Labour to have had an early election resulting in a reduced but guaranteed majority, in exchange for a five-year lease extension on Westminster. I’m sure Labour would be thrilled to no end now if they could only manage a “reduced majority.”
340.”Not complaining.. just passing comment”
Penny, welcome to PB.com on a quiet Saturday or Sunday. There is no telling where the thread will end, who will be talking to who if it becomes to bad tempered, or what topic will end up being discussed. We have had some infamous and obscure debates on issues that have sod all to do with politics or betting in the past.
I am off to have a snowball fight with my youngest.
348.I’m just cautious about going overboard with the praise for England for a good run in the qualifying group. Capello’s certainly a good coach, but ….
you can’t put lipstick on a pig.
Since and including 1990 we have qualified/competed in 8 major finals and gone out on penalties in 5 of them.
350 - You have snow? I’m jealous, I miss snow since I moved down south.
340 - Of course the lead post was about p0ker which, if you try and spell it correctly, makes your posts disappear. Maybe Morus has been playing a mind game on us.
350 LOL Christina.
As I said, I wasn’t complaining, I thought it a shame that the later contributions didn’t do such a fine leading article, full justice.
Good rugby from the Saffers. This is a thrashing.
*groan*
Sack Johnson. Sack all of them. T*ssers.
Well I guess I guess I should just think myself lucky that the thread did not develop into a full-blown discussion on the intricate strategies of P0ker.
Grice argues that Brown will savagely cut spending to try and “outmanouvere” the Tories.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/andrew-grice/andrew-grice-a-cool-chancellor-must-consider-putting-up-taxes-1029891.html
If Labour cut spending then they have completely agreed with the Tories all their arguments about a fiscal stimulus will just look daft, Brown is again following the Tory lead. Where would that leave Darmstadtium.
240.
“Suggested opening line for Osborne on Monday”
I am sure Squeaky’s mobile is well-connected enough for him to find his own supply of lines. High quality. Credit card crunch stuff.
The possible flaw in the original article is that it applies the scenario to a fairly high quality poker game. Just like watching poker on television when the commentators are seemingly able to clearly explain every move that the players make.
What it doesn’t consider is that the poker game could be very low quality, with players calling allin raises with A2, repeatedly failing to bet good hands on the flop and even often not understanding the rules.
353.”350 - You have snow? I’m jealous, I miss snow since I moved down south.”
ukpaul, lots of it, its been snowing since Thursday night. Sledges were dusted off and the kids are having a ball, it might not be coll but the eenagers still love it. I had a pot of homemade soup made by lunchtime, just what is needed on a day like this.
360.”coll but the eenagers still love” cool, but the teenagers love it. This keyboard!
QPR =
352 Which is why I argue for the apparently unpopular idea of having penalties at the end of draws at least in the football league, as it will get players used to the atmosphere of taking pens under pressure.
340
Surreal?
Sorry. You have not been here long enough - if I recall correctly.
This site is brilliant in its range of expertise and today’s variation of subjects is only different for the petty display of mean minded racism.
When some posters get excited (The EU is a classic] today would best compare to the eye of a Force 10 hurricane.
Wait till you see the main action.
Start them on the EU constitution on second thoughts, DON’T.
349: was the non-election a great missed opportunity, or will a better one come along? As Chou En Lai said of the French Revolution, it’s too early to tell.
Had a glance at the election date markets - the value bet seems to me to be 6.2 offered for a Q3/4 2009 election. If you believe (as I do) that no rapid election is planned, then the Q1/2 odds are going to lengthen steadily and people will start speculating about the autumn. It’s a myth that one can’t hold a decent election in suboptimal lighting and weather (cf Glenrothes). It might not happen, but I’m quite sure you’ll be able to lay off 6.2. Alternatively, if you still think spring 2009 might happen, lay Gordon Brown weeks on Spreadfair. You’ll make your stake for every week it’s before early December 2009 (and lose it for every week after - a pretty fair trade IMO).
Is this a good time to mention the scoreline between South Africa and Scotland last week? (Ducks for cover)
357. voreas: Grice argues that Brown will savagely cut spending to try and “outmanouvere” the Tories.
Which gives me an opportunity to add a motor racing analogy to the poker and rugby ones we’ve had already.
Thus far, every time Brown has tried to outmanoeuvre Cameron, he’s discovered that Cameron has carefully drifted just enough from the racing line that Brown thinks he can get past, but actually ends up in the gravel trap.
Keep an eye on PM-approval, folks. These guys reckon it determines elections. If Brown can maintain an approval of 40% he should win the election. Latest YouGov had him at 41%…
Powerpoint presentation here…
http://tinyurl.com/5b5nwf
Heavy math here…
http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~mlebo/Lebo%20and%20Norpoth%20BJPS.pdf
Another study compares both PM and Opposition leader performance, and reckons the Tories would have won the popular vote, but Labour the most seats if there had been an election in June 2008…
http://www.forecasters.org/submissions/NadeauRichardISF2008.pdf
We therefore need to keep an eye on the difference between Cameron’s and Brown’s rating. If if narrows to less than 10 points, again Brown should win, with Labour close to a majority…
It’s currently showing 13%
My conclusion? An election sooner rather than later…
O/T.
Will someone relieve us from all this bladder-booting comment? Let us talk of a gentleman’s sport such as fencing (epee only of course).
As a bit of afternoon delight, I offer to hose who know it not the gem that jungle bunny (and erstwhile Lib Dem London Mayoral candidate) Brian Paddick is related to the late ‘Round the Horne’ actor Hugh Paddick. Not so well known (except to Sean T?) is his well-endowed Thai-resident ladyboy cousin ‘Sue’ Paddick.
306- Royal’s support still seems to be widespread in France, if not so much so among the ranks of the movers and shakers within the PS. The reactions I’ve been reading from Socialist Party supporters today range from anger to exasperation, including vows to never again support the party that seems to have rejected their hero of 2006/2007 who took on Sarkozy and made a statement for women in politics. Who knows how far Royal will go in punishing her party by poisoning the well, but it appears that she can do quite a lot of harm to the PS if she chooses to seek revenge (which seems quite likely based on her recent comments).
367
If Gordon does cut spending, the Tories have an awful lot of his quotes to hurl at Brown.. the NHS , etc etc etc
It will be all in the small print..
(Labourhome would be fun though:-)
363. voreas: Which is why I argue for the apparently unpopular idea of having penalties at the end of draws at least in the football league, as it will get players used to the atmosphere of taking pens under pressure.
Assuming you mean the Premier League - it’s not a terrible idea, so long as it’s implemented properly (i.e. win in 90 minutes: 3 points; win on penalties: 2 points; lose on penalties: 1 point; lose in 90 minutes: 0 points). The NHL has overtime/shootout for ties in the regular season, but the OT/SO winner gets the same two points as they would get if they won in regulation. It’s crap. [Not sure if I can use the technical term!]
363,372 - not a good idea. It would increase the value of the draw and seriously damage the entertainment value of our domestic game.
257.
Grice is another of those ‘commentators’ like Finkelstein whose only purpose (fails every time) and reason for existence is to make David Aaronovitch seem comparitively intelligent.
262. PfP: I’ve always highlighted the particular text and was unaware of the select all option, which incidentally doesn’t appear to be available on Google Chrome.
I use Chrome. When I’m finished typing my post I hold Ctrl and press A and then C, which has the same effect.
357 - more to the point it would demonstrate that he is incapable of understanding any action outside of the context of party politics. Does he really think that the Conservatives are pursuing their current line as a political ploy? Does he really think the Conservatives are happy with a situation where their opponents are offering tax cuts where they can’t reciprocate? There is absolutely NOTHING the Conservatives would like better than for Gordon to reduce public spending to improve our deficit position.
Aside from justifying their current stance, it would enable them to return to concentrate their attack on who caused the mess in the first place, rather than getting involved in opposing populist policies for the long term sake of the economy.
376.
“Does he really think that the Conservatives are pursuing their current line as a political ploy? ”
The Tories pursue EVERY line (except those GideO is crushing) as a political ploy. That is the purpose of Conservatism. To get into power. Period.
377 - Oh really? So you think they’ve got public opinion on their side on this one then?
369. Epee is boring. The women’s epee at the Olympics was dreadful. The men’s sabre final was excellent with Zhu (Chn) getting the gold and the men’s foil semi between Ota (Jpn) and Sanzo (Ita) was wonderful. But, I dont think you can bet on the event.
alex:
372: It would increase the value of the draw
Some, not much, provided that the winner of the penalty shootout earned fewer points than a winner in 90 minutes. This is the major flaw in the NHL - teams almost always spend the last few minutes of regulation and the overtime period trying not to lose so that they get one point and a chance for the second in the shootout.
376: it would demonstrate that he is incapable of understanding any action outside of the context of party politics.
…again!
365- My only observation on the matter is that, objectively speaking, an October/November 2007 election wouldn’t have been a terrible thing for Labour even if they had lost half of their majority (and I’m saying this not only in hindsight but also at the time). There was every reason to believe at the time that Labour would have easily kept its majority and that events over the following years (after ten years in power) were likely treacherous.
But for Brown, it may well have been a different story. It’s ironic that, had he called the early election, he might have undermined his own career for obtaining a result that would see him declared a conquering hero were he to secure the same result today.
One thing that argues more for a spring 2009 election than a later election is that opportunities may never return if they’re passed up. If Labour can get itself into a decent winning position by March or so, they should in my opinion go for it. Even a few points advantage in the polls should be enough to roll the dice since there’s no way to be sure a better chance would ever materialize. Morus cautions against being overeager in light of a past lost opportunity but, on the other hand, there is less and less to lose as time goes on (and fewer possible future opportunities) as June 2010 approaches.
380 - At present a win is worth 3pts a draw 1pt. The best teams are consistently those who understand that the value of the win is such that you should never be happy with the draw, be it the first minute or the 91st. It is why ManUtd have won so many titles since 1992 and Liverpool haven’t come close.
Your proposed system would increase the value of the draw to 1.5pts. That’s a big change.
Not that it would ever happen anyway, because our domestic football system does not exist to produce a successful national team.
375 LS - Many thanks for that, I’ll give it a try.
How do you guys discover these clever tricks?
372 I actually do mean the football league, as the premier league is full of Foreign Players and would equally improve foreign teams penalty taking. In the football league you would have young premiership players on loan taking penalties who may eventually be internationals, but without foreign internationals getting the advantage.
Of course you could introduce it in the premiership as obviously more English Internationals will benefit than a single other countrys internationals. Either way it might make our penalty taking improve.
323 Voreas. Darmsetc. is not priceless He’s a pompous ass who thinks he impresses by using words he only half understands.His best effort was 213, where he quotes Descartes, clearly without understanding the Latin, as it has no relevance to the rest of the post whatever.Affected? Who, moi?
Anyone know if we’re expecting polls tonight?
384 - there is nothing stopping individuals practicing penalties if they so wish. You don’t need a drawn football match to do it.
The idea that you need such practice is easily disproven by the example of Germany. And a World Cup knockout match is rather removed in pressure level from a league match for an extra point.
387. I always think that this notion that practicing penalties makes no difference is a kind of convenient after-the fact rationalisation - ie. as a coach or player you have to really convince it’s true otherwise you’ve just made the most elementary, costly mistake of your life. Surely David Batty is proof enough that it’s an idea to at least have had a go at a penalty once or twice.
385 yes, but that is a reason why he is priceless, the other is overly dramatic language as I quoted above. I find it quite good fun to read, he is like an inarticulae SeanT.
Morus
Well written as ever. However I think the first thursday in May is favourite for the election. First because people will have the tx cuts in their wages by then and second because it avoids the confusion of three elections on the same day and third gives Labour enough time to get their act together on the ground…unless the polls are really bad its not going to get better after June which is now the last realistic date for labour to either cling on or see a tiny Tory majority..
387 The point is not about just practicing penalties. The point is getting practice at taking penalties in a high pressure situation.
Someone was asking me about the Number 10 response to the Jeremy Clarkson for PM petition (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cNy1w4DV5Hw ) for those who haven’t seen it. Much derided here at the time, it’s been seen by 245000 people, eight times as many as have watched Clarkson’s YouTube pitch. It’s not a brilliant piece, but still seems to me to offer a pleasantly light response to a wind-up.
Anyone still in any doubt about Brown’s “leadership” in the world financial crisis might like to read this, from Bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=az43Y55hmZhY
In a long and detailed article by Jennifer M. Freedman on whether the Americans are unfairly trying to subsidize their car industry and whether their carmaker-bailout proposals may spark trade disputes, she surprisingly makes not a single mention of Gordon Brown - or of the UK for that matter.
However, the article is littered with the names of the genuinely important:
Garel Rhys, professor of automotive economics at Cardiff Business School.
Neelie Kroes, the European Union’s antitrust chief.
President-elect Barack Obama.
Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders chief Paul Everitt.
Gian Primo Quagliano head of research at Bologna, Italy-based research firm Promotor.
European Investment Bank President Philippe Maystadt.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Carl-Peter Forster, General Motors’ Europe chief.
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Winfried Vahland, Volkswagen’s China head.
Zeng Qinghong, general manager of Guangzhou Automobile Group.
Japanese Finance Minister Shoichi Nakagawa.
European Commission President Jose Barroso.
Korean President Lee Myung-bak.
Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research.
GM Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner.
It’s such a pity that our newspapers no longer do any genuine reporting like this, they just cut and paste from political party briefings. That’s why we rarely, if ever, get the truth.
382. alex: Your proposed system would increase the value of the draw to 1.5pts. That’s a big change.
Assuming that penalties are random.
384. voreas: I actually do mean the football league
No thanks. How many England internationals play in the Football League? They’re all in the Greedy League.
391. I understand that argument, but that’s why I mentioned the extreme case of David Batty. Regardless of the pressure, surely no-one can be in any doubt that he would have stood a better statistical chance of scoring had he not been in the position of never having taken a penalty before, even in practice.
393 - Without wishing to detract from the undeniable eminence of Prof. Rhys at Cardiff Business School, I probably would have begun your list with President-elect Obama or Chancellor Merkel!
394 - If they weren’t it would make the problem even worse! For some teams the value of the draw would be even higher!
388 - I didn’t say players shouldn’t practice penalties! Of course they should and they do! (the idea that they don’t is a myth). If you don’t know what you’re trying to do when you take a penalty then you’ve got no chance.
Voreas is right that you can’t replicate the pressure on the training ground. But you can’t do it in a run of the mill league match for an extra point either.
Afternoon all,
Great article from Morus.
On the betting side, I decided last night to close my Labour Sell position on the spreads at a loss, and switch to buy Labour. This turned out to be good timing, because SPIN moved up 6 seats today (as Mike was indicating yesterday). I think comments from PfP and URW last night and today are right; the spreads are lagging behind the sentiment changes seen in the polls (they did the same in respect of the McCain bounce a couple of months ago).
I anticipate that this Labour bounce will be temporary. We should bear in mind that both the economics and the politics are highly volatile at present. However, the fundamentals and Brown’s character are both very negative for Labour, so I expect sentiment to reverse in a couple of months (or possibly sooner), depending on how things play out.
As to election date, I think there is a 50% chance of a H1 2009 election (despite Nick P saying “it ain’t gonna happen”). Basically this is because Labour will want capitalise on what is clearly an irrational change in Brown’s ratings, which is unlikely to last, and before the full horrors of the recession have hit home. Since the odds over 2-1 for this option, I’ve bet accordingly, but like PfP I’m watching the Leader Exit Dates and have taken a little of Q3 2010 as an insurance policy.
As for the election result, I’m puzzled as to why Labour supporters are so confident their new message will go down well. Going into an election promising substantial tax increases would be brave, given the obvious massive waste in public expenditure.
Interesting Populus PS on the US election (from their free monthly report to subscribers, always a good read - to sub, email perspective@populus.co.uk):
In terms of scale, the Obama victory closely resembles Bill Clinton’s first win, in 1992: a margin of about 6% in the popular vote and around 200 in the electoral college.
But Barack Obama won two states that Bill Clinton didn’t win (nor Jimmy Carter, the previous Democrat to win the Presidency): Virginia and Indiana. Neither state had voted for a Democrat since 1964, when Lyndon Johnson won all but six states in his decimation of Barry Goldwater. Before that Virginia hadn’t backed a Democrat for President since Harry Truman in 1948, and Indiana, which gave Obama a clean- sweep of the Midwest, hadn’t done so since Franklin Roosevelt’s second term, in 1936. These were significant – surprising – victories, powered by the strength of the Obama ‘ground war’, the impact of the economy as an electoral issue in these states and, in the case of Virginia, significant demographic change.
Tellingly, however, there were five states (highlighted on the map below) that Bill Clinton won in 1992 – which, in fact, every winning Democrat has always won – but which went this time to John McCain, not Barack Obama. Furthermore, on a day when almost every single part of American society was swinging to the Democrats at least to a degree, in three of these states (West Virginia, Tennessee and Arkansas) there was a swing away from the Democrats. The exit poll in these states reveals that nearly a third of white registered Democrats voted for John McCain – more than twice the national average. This is evidence that there remained to the end a corpus of white blue-collar Democrats who Barack Obama never convinced. They had strongly preferred Hillary Clinton as Democrat candidate and in the end some of them we willing vote Republican rather than for Barack Hussein Obama.
The most important thing you can do in preparation for a penalty shoot-out is to practice and know your best penalty takers so they actually get to take one.
Beyond that it’s largely down to luck.
This isn’t Casino Royale (and I should know) this is a British government.
Gordon Brown knows he will lose his majority if he calls an election and I doubt he ever *will* actively call one until he has a double-digit poll lead.
He’d be gambling that the voters in the super-marginals would thank him for a recession.
Um….?
396. Morus, I didn’t make any attempt to prioritise the list (I wouldn’t dare!). The order is that in which they appear in the article.
Wow just logged on. This is one of my all-time favourite articles on pb.com, no surprise as I am a passionate lover of The Great Card Game That Cannot Be Named.
Just out of interest, as different rules apply to those actually writing articles for the site, is this the first time The Great Card Game That Cannot Be Named has actually been named on here, without using some ugly combo of letters and numerals?
FWIW, I reckon Gord’s best bet is to check-raise Cammo by flushing his policies out over the winter by continually asking what he is going to cut, then coming over the top with a snap GE in the early spring.
As Morus seems to have had the ear of Labour strategists over the timing of the Glenrothes by-election (in fact as a Nationalist I intend to maintain a personal vendetta against him for the rest of his life for needlessly giving them such wise advice), perhaps a few of us could band together now and bribe him to write an article luring Gordon Brown into a trap. An article that in a very logical, plausible way makes the case for an election at what would in fact be the worst possible moment for Labour. Trouble is, I’ve no idea what that moment would be.
21. Jonathan – nice analogy but what is S&D?
395. What kind of professional fails to practise off his own bat?
405. Submission and Domination.
407. Aha. Now I grasp it, Camo took Ozzie and some pals down Mayfair for a bit of dungeon action, thus winning the expected “libertarian leap” in the polls. This was before slipping back when Ozzie was revealed to actually be a bit boring: he was found on a yacht full of bronzed mediterranean beauties doing nothing more exciting than talking to some fat Russian bloke about borrowing a few quid. All stacks up now.
385. Svejk’d On Voreas’s comment: He was questioning my existence and suggesting that I am “economical with the truth”. I can assure you that I am in touch with the real world and have not succumbed to an attack of solipsisis, which I am afraid is ironically what afflicts those who accuse me of being a computer generated contributor. And so the reference to Descartes’s famous dictum is therfore completely relevant