Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Guest]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

Sterling now back at the same rate against the dollar than it was just before the referendum.

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/pound-to-euro-and-pound-to-dollar-exchange-rate-sterling-hits-prebrexit-high-against-the-dollar-a3747186.html

 

4 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Strange article because it's not at all true. The pound was actually 1.49 against the dollar immediately pre-referendum so at 1.39 it's still substantially lower. 

 

3 hours ago, Fox Ulike said:

Seems you're right... Strange thing to get wrong from the Standard:

 

It's all betting for shits and giggles. 2 thoughts:

 

1- everybody expects the uk to go for the softest possible Brexit. 

2- bets are on that basis

 

If we were to crash out with no deal the pound would drop quicker than on referendum day. The fact the uk has caved in to every demand, even when it had gone against stated positions, is helping things along. There's no appetite for hard Brexit between tm and dd or in parliament and it won't happen. I'd put money on a second referendum if it became at all likely.

[Guest]

To give Matty a way out of explaining why he put his earlier post up, I find it amusing that he's often so determined to believe that labour are falling apart when the tory front bench can literally agree on nothing.

 

Theresa May humiliates Boris Johnson in front of cabinet as Tories clash over NHS funding

http://flip.it/VMRLgh

 

Edited 23 January 2018 by Guest

[fuchsntf]

8 minutes ago, toddybad said:

To give Matty a way out of explaining why he put his earlier post up, I find it amusing that he's often so determined to believe that labour are falling apart when the tory front bench can literally agree on nothing.

 

Theresa May humiliates Boris Johnson in front of cabinet as Tories clash over NHS funding

http://flip.it/VMRLgh

 

Tories want to reshape the whole health and medical platform.They want to kill it, but get away with manslaughter.

Unfortunately, I cant see this labour group of 2 faced socialist having the competence, to recreate/redevelope  nor

introduce the major changes it needs.NHS is still a viable working institution, that can if well ran, be a blue flag

organisation , that the UK peoples could be proud of.

Tories have in the lsst 40yrs just played evil politics with NHS and its services and the educational organisation needs

for all of its peoples...

Labour politicians sold out social politics, and climbed to the top of the political chain with words-only..

Blairs group, fked up!! A group of sell-outs who didnt realise, what the socialist movement meant, and

what platform they had, to improve the nations lot...

[Guest MattP]

35 minutes ago, toddybad said:

To give Matty a way out of explaining why he put his earlier post up, I find it amusing that he's often so determined to believe that labour are falling apart when the tory front bench can literally agree on nothing.

 

Theresa May humiliates Boris Johnson in front of cabinet as Tories clash over NHS funding

http://flip.it/VMRLgh

 

I trusted the Evening Standard, I won't again. (Surely understandable given its editorial stance on Brexit)

 

Nothing to get out of, sure we'll be back at actual pre-ref levels before too long.

Edited 23 January 2018 by MattP

[DJ Barry Hammond]

6 hours ago, Rogstanley said:

Strange article because it's not at all true. The pound was actually 1.49 against the dollar immediately pre-referendum so at 1.39 it's still substantially lower. 

 

Yes, but the £ had risen sharply in the run up to the referendum - which some commentators said at the time was due to the confidence a ‘remain vote’ would be returned. That old chestnut of ‘pricing-in’.

 

If you recall referendum night, i’m sure the £ went up significantly just after polls closed too, when the thinking was remain would be ok (there was an early interview with Farage whining about losing). 

 

So the key thing to determin whether the article is correct or not is when they are taking the pre-data from... and I suspect there is a 1.39 point within a reasonable timeframe.

Edited 23 January 2018 by DJ Barry Hammond

[DJ Barry Hammond]

On 22/01/2018 at 18:10, Webbo said:

From 2010 to before the referendum everytime a tory MP went on the TV they'd be asked when they were going to cut immigration and when they said they'd try the reporter would reply we couldn't because the EU wouldn't let us. We were supposed to sack the tories for lying but we ended up sacking the EU instead.

 

People have the right to expect the govt they elect to carry out the policies they voted for should be able to carry out those policies without having to ask foreign govts for permission. It's all about taking back control.

Any decent journalist would also have pointed out that the government had failed to make an impact on the immigrant numbers that they didn’t have control of. 

 

Oh - and I believe part of the reason for the questioning you mention was because of a pledge within the Conservatives manifesto’s since that time.

Edited 23 January 2018 by DJ Barry Hammond

[Rogstanley]

12 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Yes, but the £ had risen sharply in the run up to the referendum - which some commentators said at the time was due to the confidence a ‘remain vote’ would be returned. That old chestnut of ‘pricing-in’.

 

If you recall referendum night, i’m sure the £ went up significantly just after polls closed too, when the thinking was remain would be ok (there was an early interview with Farage whining about losing). 

 

So the key thing to determin whether the article is correct or not is when they are taking the pre-data from... and I suspect there is a 1.39 point within a reasonable timeframe.

It's correct to say that the value of the pound increased immediately prior to the referendum, from about 1.45 to 1.49. But ever since 2008 it had been trading in a relatively narrow range between about 1.45 and 1.70 (there or there abouts - can't get the 10 year graph on my phone). So actually although it spiked to 1.49 on referendum night, it was still quite weak by recent historical standards.

 

Speculation abound as to the reasons for the movements, but for me it fell gradually from its steady post-2008 range as the referendum became a reality and got closer and closer, then spiked upwards when it looked like remain would win, followed by the collapse when brexit won, and now a gradual climb as a hard crash brexit looks to have been averted and instead a very soft brexit is starting to look like a reasonably probable outcome.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

On 22/01/2018 at 19:42, Strokes said:

Well I can’t speak for Webbo but I’m thinking maybe there is a bit of miscommunication. Assuming the Indian Asda staff have children, they would only be able to take them out over the holidays like the rest of us. So it’s the cheapest time that they can go. So I checked and yeah I’m right.

Xmas £461, Easter £510, summer holidays average £550.

 

On 22/01/2018 at 19:58, Strokes said:

Find me cheaper than that in the summer then.

 

This looked like a fun game so thought i’d have a go...

 

Now I did my search with a hypothetical family of four. 2 adults, 2 chlidren aged 8 and 10 with direct flights only and did beat the £550 ‘average’ with a price of £480 - but that’s still not lower than the £461 quoted as ‘xmas’.

 

However, Sky Scanner also provides month range graphs which i’ve provided images of, which may be useful for comparison - but I also noticed prices for the return always change when you hit and out flight. 

 

But there is one further important point to make here - the method being use to decide ‘is summer or xmas’ more expensive isn’t strictly sound... there’s lots of variables at play in your searches that don’t make it a fair test (for example, xmas flights might be cheaper now because it’s 11 months away. But wouldn’t summer flights also be cheaper if you were booking them 11 months ahead instead of in January (a popular time for booking summer holidays).

 

A safer way at looking at this is to find some historical data from airlines of average ticket prices over the last 12 months - so historic data, rather than trying to project forward. 

 

But ulitmately - your arguments between the two are probably pointless; as I expect both periods are as expensive as each other given the captative market. 

[Strokes]

9 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

 

This looked like a fun game so thought i’d have a go...

 

Now I did my search with a hypothetical family of four. 2 adults, 2 chlidren aged 8 and 10 with direct flights only and did beat the £550 ‘average’ with a price of £480 - but that’s still not lower than the £461 quoted as ‘xmas’.

 

However, Sky Scanner also provides month range graphs which i’ve provided images of, which may be useful for comparison - but I also noticed prices for the return always change when you hit and out flight. 

 

But there is one further important point to make here - the method being use to decide ‘is summer or xmas’ more expensive isn’t strictly sound... there’s lots of variables at play in your searches that don’t make it a fair test (for example, xmas flights might be cheaper now because it’s 11 months away. But wouldn’t summer flights also be cheaper if you were booking them 11 months ahead instead of in January (a popular time for booking summer holidays).

 

A safer way at looking at this is to find some historical data from airlines of average ticket prices over the last 12 months - so historic data, rather than trying to project forward. 

 

But ulitmately - your arguments between the two are probably pointless; as I expect both periods are as expensive as each other given the captative market. 

It’s definitely cheaper over Xmas.

[Carl the Llama]

Did you guys know that pigeons mate for life?

[Rogstanley]

4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

It’s definitely cheaper over Xmas.

 

It clearly is not.

[Wymsey]

Margaret Thatcher statue plan rejected..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42795060

[Sharpe's Fox]

10 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Margaret Thatcher statue plan rejected..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42795060

No statues for traitors

[Strokes]

38 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

 

It clearly is not.

It clearly is. As nobody can find cheaper.

[Carl the Llama]

Both female and male pigeons share responsibility of caring for and raising young. Both sexes take turn incubating the eggs and both feed the chicks ‘pigeon milk’ – a special secretion from the lining of the crop which both sexes produce.

[lifted*fox]

[Guest]

UK opposes strong EU recycling targets despite plastics pledge

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/24/uk-opposes-strong-eu-recycling-targets-despite-plastics-pledge?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

[Buce]

19 minutes ago, toddybad said:

UK opposes strong EU recycling targets despite plastics pledge

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/24/uk-opposes-strong-eu-recycling-targets-despite-plastics-pledge?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

 

No surprises there. 

 

 

[Guest MattP]

Quite incredible. You wonder what else these people will try and effect as a central body, how anyone can still try to claim this is a political party than will help the poorest is unbelievable when they do things like this.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42795708

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labours-ruling-nec-votes-to-halt-haringey-council-hdv-scheme_uk_5a67625be4b0e5630073f84d

 

 

Quote

 

Labour's National Executive Committee has called on the party's councillors in a north London borough to halt a controversial housing project.

It has advised Labour-run Haringey to pause the project - which has split the local party - if mediation aimed at overcoming the divisions fails.

The project is opposed locally by pro-Corbyn pressure group Momentum.

The NEC was meeting for the first time since Momentum founder Jon Lansman was elected as one of its members.

• Labour battle lines drawn in Haringey

The public private partnership to redevelop a large council estate has proved hugely divisive within the Haringey Labour Party.

The row came to national attention when Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn signalled his misgivings at last year's party conference.

Momentum has campaigned against the project, suggesting it could lead to social cleansing.

Around a third of the Labour group - mainly supporters of the scheme - have since either been deselected, or have stood down ahead of this spring's council elections.

Momentum is likely to have a strong influence on council policy if Labour wins the May election, so the future of the scheme had already been in doubt.

Labour's ruling national executive is advising the existing council leadership to pause its plans for the project if local divisions continue - this, in effect, could kill it off.

Supporters of the scheme argued it would bring much needed private funds into the regeneration of a deprived area.

 

 

Edited 24 January 2018 by MattP

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, MattP said:

Quite incredible. You wonder what else these people will try and effect as a central body, how anyone can still try to claim this is a political party than will help the poorest is unbelievable when they do things like this.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42795708

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labours-ruling-nec-votes-to-halt-haringey-council-hdv-scheme_uk_5a67625be4b0e5630073f84d

 

 

 

What on earth are you talking about?

 

The scheme as is will see loads of poor families leave their homes. A public/private partnership will then redevelop the site. None of the families are guaranteed to get a home at the end of it. 

 

Schemes elsewhere have seen huge reductions in the social housing provision at the end and we've only just seen multiple examples of privatisation/outsourcing/partnerships have poor effects. Clearly labour believes in public funding so why would they support this scheme?

 

The only thing incredible about your post is the number of straws you've tried to clutch.

Edited 24 January 2018 by Guest

[Guest MattP]

Just now, toddybad said:

What on earth are you talking about?

 

The scheme as is will see loads of poor families leave their homes. A public/private partnership will then redevelop the site. None of the families are guaranteed to get a home at the end of it. 

 

Schemes elsewhere have seen huge reductions in the social housing provision at the end and we've only just seen multiple examples of privatisation/outsourcing/partnerships have poor effects. Clearly labour believes in public funding so why would they support this scheme.

 

The only thing incredible about your post is the number of straws you've tried to clutch.

The scheme would have brought serious funding into one of the most deprived areas in the country.

 

Is this going to be the new line of attack? Carillion failed so we're going to now refuse any company doing absolutely anything.

 

Are you now telling me Labour is committing to building every single project in the country without any private funding? If you think that's viable you are crazy.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, MattP said:

The scheme would have brought serious funding into one of the most deprived areas in the country.

 

Is this going to be the new line of attack? Carillion failed so we're going to now refuse any company doing absolutely anything.

 

Are you now telling me Labour is committing to building every single project in the country without any private funding? If you think that's viable you are crazy.

The scheme would have seen scores of families lose their homes.

 

Explain to me how council houses were built first time around?

 

The government can borrow the money for development more cheaply than any private investor. If the government/council owns social housing then it has an appreciating asset worth more than it cost to build from the moment it is completed. By renting out the housing the council retains the asset as well as deriving an income. In order to fund further building you can keep right to buy but change the rules so councils use the revenue to fund further building. The scheme self funds.

Edited 24 January 2018 by Guest

[lgfualol]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

UK opposes strong EU recycling targets despite plastics pledge

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/24/uk-opposes-strong-eu-recycling-targets-despite-plastics-pledge?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Regarding plastic recycling, I don't know why the UK doesn't charge a small fee for plastic bottles that you get back when you recycle it. Works perfectly well in Germany, I have never seen a plastic bottle on the floor or in a hedge, whereas when I am in England I see loads just thrown on the floor. 

[Buce]

1 minute ago, lgfualol said:

Regarding plastic recycling, I don't know why the UK doesn't charge a small fee for plastic bottles that you get back when you recycle it. Works perfectly well in Germany, I have never seen a plastic bottle on the floor or in a hedge, whereas when I am in England I see loads just thrown on the floor. 

 

I'm sure I'll incur someone's wrath for daring to be critical of my own country but littering is ingrained in the British psyche, and the prospect of getting a couple of pence back for the bottle will have no effect on that.

 

Making the deposit meaningful (say, a quid) is the only way it would have any effect.

[Rogstanley]

9 hours ago, Strokes said:

It clearly is. As nobody can find cheaper.

You haven't posted any details of an actual flight over summer whereas both myself and Barry did and we both found it to be cheaper. You've basically just made up a number. Typical Tory.