Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB / Polling Matters podcast: German election special & Labour

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited September 27 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB / Polling Matters podcast: German election special & Labour conference reaction

On this week’s PB / Polling Matters podcast, Keiran is joined by Dr Roland Kappe of UCL to discuss the recent German election results and what happens next.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 1,603
    edited September 27
    First! Like Labour next time! :lol:
  • If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?
  • If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    Yup. I suspect they'll only rescind it/deny it if he commits a criminal act in Australia.

    But I wouldn't expect a trial until later on in 2017.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 26,149
    I've a long journey to do tomorrow, I look forward to digesting info on the German elections.

    Pleasant thoughts all.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
  • dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27
    Just seen a batch of still of ginger nut, looks very bad. He takes on not one but two different people.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 1,603
    edited September 27
    FPT:
    SeanT said:

    If Boris moves now prepare for a second snap Brexit election in the Spring. It's the only logic to him moving now. The moment he enters No 10 he inherits the same dismal hand that May has now. How to let down Brexiters with no Commons majority as back up. If we wants to collapse the talks and go for nuclear Brexit that surely requires an election as well.If he's concluded he needs to move now prepare for a second snap election.

    Thought I think Thornberry's conference jibe had a purpose. She followed Amber Rudd in making the same jibe hidden in plain sight.

    We all know the rumours about Boris. I doubt they would have any effect, now.
    I doubt they'd have any significant effect with the population at large but they might do with the PCP and/or with Tory party members.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 57,213
    edited September 27
    I'm wondering if The Sun's legal department were on holiday today.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
    I doubt you'd say that to Ged Stokes. Or his son by the looks of it! :)
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 19,987
    fpt for williamglenn

    And yet, here is Edward Heath blithely promising there would be no loss of sovereignty.



    The tragedy of Brexit is that intelligent europhiles like you could and should have granted any of the previously-demanded referendums, and the UK would have voted NO, and EU integration would have ended - at least for us.

    That would have lanced the democratic boil. The people would have spoken. We would have shuffled and bumbled our way to a kind of associate membership, where we would have been happy. No Brexit.

    Instead, the europhiles decided to thwart the democratic will at every single opportunity, often quite outrageously, and the result was that the untreated tonsilitis of euroscepticism turned into the menacing quinsy of Brexit. And now there is blood and pus all over the floor.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 10,044
    Bojo Vs Jezza 2018?
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
    I doubt you'd say that to Ged Stokes. Or his son by the looks of it! :)
    Ben Stokes can throw 15 punches in a minute? Pah.
  • Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?
  • glwglw Posts: 3,853

    Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?

    Not really. In the wonderful world of Corbynism business will simply go along with his plans, and certainly won't pull the plug on investment or relocate.

    I have to say that the robot tax sounds particularly stupid, and will likely stifle quite a bit of UK development and deployment.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420
    Bloody hell! This site has been getting salty today. Now TSE is calling out professional sportsmen.

    The words of JC really were inflammatory.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    Did Corbyn say anything today about wealth creation or job creation (public sector excepted)? Was there anything said at the entire conference that might encourage investment in the UK?

    There was quite a big chunk on a National Investment Bank, providing good well paid secure jobs.

    Quite likely pie in the sky, but it was a part of the speech.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
    Not a proper Northerner!
  • dixiedean said:

    Bloody hell! This site has been getting salty today. Now TSE is calling out professional sportsmen.

    The words of JC really were inflammatory.

    I'm a Yorkshireman, I'm not scared of anything.

    Except snakes.

    I'm like a pound shop Indiana Jones, except I'm a better historian.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 3,881
    edited September 27

    I'm wondering if The Sun's legal department were on holiday today.

    Why, what did I miss?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    If he has a conviction then he can probably be made an Aussie on the spot, and play for the home team.
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 881
    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.
  • dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
    Not a proper Northerner!
    South Yorkshire is Union.
  • Assuming the Sun's video shows what they say it does it seems unlikely that Stokes can tour Oz and inconceivable that he can retain the vice captaincy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646
    edited September 27
    I don't see how the German election result can be seen as bad for the Brexit negotiations.

    Had Schulz won that would have been devastating for them given he is an ardent Europhile who believes the UK should be punished for Brexit but he was trounced. Instead Merkel won but lost a lot of votes and seats to the pro Brexit AfD and will have to govern in coalition with the FDP who are more pro UK and the City of London than the SPD
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646
    edited September 27

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    If they don't expect England fans to come out with a lot of chants about the criminal history of those who were first let into Australia and their descendants on the opposing team
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 8,602
    edited September 27
    Chris_A said:

    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.

    Nothing to worry about - the trillion pound of exports by 2020 George predicted is a certainty.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,377
    Stokes' right hook was better than anything Tyson's nephew threw against Joseph Parker to be fair though.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27
    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    One other thing...is that Alex Hales kicking the guy on the floor? or the random other mate? I am guessing if it the former, he could be in the shit too.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,377

    Assuming the Sun's video shows what they say it does it seems unlikely that Stokes can tour Oz and inconceivable that he can retain the vice captaincy.

    Well he should probably lose the vice captaincy but he is an absolute lock on the team sheet stats wise (Highest rated all rounder for either side)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,118
    Chris_A said:

    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.

    We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
  • A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    One other thing...is that Alex Hales kicking the guy on the floor? or the random other mate? I am guessing if it the former, he could be in the shit too.

    An individual who is with Stokes takes a massive kick at the initial attackers head.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420
    edited September 27

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
  • Does not seem very professional that Stokes and Hales were apparently out drinking and fighting at 2.30am during a one day international series.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 2,113
    surbiton said:

    Chris_A said:

    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.

    We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
    Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27
    dixiedean said:

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
    It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
  • Does not seem very professional that Stokes and Hales were apparently out drinking and fighting at 2.30am during a one day international series.

    For the second week running....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    dixiedean said:

    If ginger nut gets a criminal record can the Australian authorities decide to not allow him in?

    His Dad was certainly not backward in coming forward as they say. He was prop for the NZRL team. Good player.
    Rugby league's not a proper sport.

    You don't get that poncey fifth tackle rule in Union.
    Not a proper Northerner!
    South Yorkshire is Union.
    Indeed it is. And in the south, too!
  • PongPong Posts: 4,277
    edited September 27
    Excellent newsnight feature on Grenfell

    Top class journalism
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27
    I hate to think what would happen if somebody tried to bottle Manu Tuilagi on one of his many drunken nights out....

    Chris Ashton must be one hard bastard.

  • Yorkcity said:

    surbiton said:

    Chris_A said:

    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.

    We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
    Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
    Or £30 bn to the EU to keep them happy?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    dixiedean said:

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
    It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
    Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.

    https://www.joe.ie/sport/graph-bigger-is-better-check-out-how-the-size-of-rugby-players-has-changed-in-the-last-40-years-434067
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424
    Pong said:

    Excellent newsnight feature on Grenfell

    Top class journalism

    It was very good indeed
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    I hate to think what would happen if somebody tried to bottle Manu Tuilagi on one of his many drunken nights out....

    Chris Ashton must be one hard bastard.

    Wiganer. All bets are off.
  • dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
    It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
    Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.

    https://www.joe.ie/sport/graph-bigger-is-better-check-out-how-the-size-of-rugby-players-has-changed-in-the-last-40-years-434067
    There is also some suggestion that perhaps all these gains might have been aided by more than sports science....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
    It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
    Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.

    https://www.joe.ie/sport/graph-bigger-is-better-check-out-how-the-size-of-rugby-players-has-changed-in-the-last-40-years-434067
    There is also some suggestion that perhaps all these gains might have been aided by more than sports science....
    You may say that Mr. Urquhart. I couldn't possibly comment.
  • Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!

    TSE double teaming? Sure it could be arranged!
  • Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!

    How about a team brawl - England footballers against England cricketers.

    Or RU vs RL.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27
    I think I have told this story on here before, but...

    I few years ago, I was in Vegas and just chilling in the pool, when suddenly the sun appeared to be in eclipse. When I looked to see what was bloking out my rays, I was confronted with this beast in tiny speedos who looked like the statue of David with extra muscly bits...after a few seconds I realised that the balding gentleman was in fact Lawrence Dallaglio.

    As you can imagine, I refrained from informing him that he was in fact blocking my rays and would he mind moving or that his budgie smugglers were shall we say rather revealing.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 24,016
    edited September 27

    Manu and Stokesy look like they will both have plenty of time on their hands this winter. Perhaps they could take some of their energy out on one another!

    How about a team brawl - England footballers against England cricketers.

    Or RU vs RL.
    RU vs RL sounds a good one. I seemed to remember they once played a cross code series, best RL vs best RU in league and union match, and it got a bit tasty at times.
  • Does this mean that Jeremy Hunt is eight times as good as Nye Bevin ?

    ' When the NHS was launched in 1948, it had a budget of £437 million (roughly £15 billion at today’s value). For 2015/16, the overall NHS budget was around £116.4 billion '

    http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,426
    edited September 27
    UK must deal with its debts, May to say

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41419858

    "Theresa May is set to restate her determination to be tough on public spending despite political pressure to ease up on austerity.

    "Continuing to deal with our debts," is the way to strengthen the economy, the prime minister will insist on Thursday.

    "Unless there are Northern Irish politicians to bribe, in which case the deficit can go hang. Keeping myself in my job is more important than that", she will add."
  • Danny565 said:

    UK must deal with its debts, May to say

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41419858

    "Theresa May is set to restate her determination to be tough on public spending despite political pressure to ease up on austerity.

    "Continuing to deal with our debts," is the way to strengthen the economy, the prime minister will insist on Thursday.

    "Unless there are Northern Irish politicians to bribe, in which case the deficit can go hang. Keeping myself in my job is more important than that", she will add."

    How about an EU to bribe?
  • A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,420

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    A couple of thoughts about Stokes...he so easily could have been bottled, and second it is a good job he was absolutely mullered, if he can knock somebody out with once punch like that, if he had been less wasted he would more than likely have landed with more of those punches.

    Indeed. Modern sportsmen (and women tbf) are so highly-tuned and athletic, they literally don't know their own strength. They are simply not used to mixing it with ordinary (possible) drunkards. Good job it was not the US or other places. He could have been shot.

    And no TSE around to protect him!!
    It is a very good point. If you ever meet any professional sportsmen, most have a particular physique and ain't the sort you see posers in the gym. They have muscles in places you never thought existed and are seriously strong.
    Yep. Sports science has moved on seriously in the last 40 years or so. Here is an interesting comparison.

    https://www.joe.ie/sport/graph-bigger-is-better-check-out-how-the-size-of-rugby-players-has-changed-in-the-last-40-years-434067
    There is also some suggestion that perhaps all these gains might have been aided by more than sports science....
    Chemistry is a science tbf. Everyone is simply bigger, stronger and fitter these days.

    I remain to be convinced they are any more skillful...
  • A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Shades of 1812 and all that
  • Yesterday a Guardian article said Emmanuelle Macron was the president of France.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Shades of 1812 and all that
    We are going to burn down tbe White House again? Cool! but may annoy Trump a bit.
  • A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Shades of 1812 and all that
    We are going to burn down tbe White House again? Cool! but may annoy Trump a bit.
    Well that is true. But...

    What I meant is we were fighting Europe AND the US!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Shades of 1812 and all that
    Though we were united with Canada then too
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 24,104
    edited September 27
    HYUFD said:

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway

    There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/theresa-may-threatens-us-withtrade-war-bombardier-row/

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646

    HYUFD said:

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway

    There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/theresa-may-threatens-us-withtrade-war-bombardier-row/

    As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.

    It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration
  • http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/boeing-bombardier-trade-war-brewster-1.4308734


    "Boeing Super Hornet jet purchase likely to become 1st casualty in possible trade war

    "Critics question Trudeau's tactic of linking Super Hornet purchase with Bombardier trade dispute"
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway

    There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/theresa-may-threatens-us-withtrade-war-bombardier-row/

    As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.

    It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration


    I am merely echoing the Tory-supporting, Brexit-backing Telegraph. As for a transition deal, we'll get one if the EU agrees. That means the UK accepting the conditions they set out. It's not up to us.

  • Night all.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    A cliff edge Brexit and a trade war with the US. Brave.

    Hardly a trade war because of a dispute over Boeing, in which we are supported by Canada and of course there will be a transition period until 2021 now anyway

    There'll only be a transition period if the EU agrees. Canada + the UK v the US in a trade war. Hmmm.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/27/theresa-may-threatens-us-withtrade-war-bombardier-row/

    As long as Britain makes the payments and continues free movement during that time, which May has said she will, the EU will agree.

    It is also not a trade war, it is a dispute over Boeing which does not even control all the aerospace market let alone the whole UK US Canadian trading market and it was a dispute started by Boeing and the US administration


    I am merely echoing the Tory-supporting, Brexit-backing Telegraph. As for a transition deal, we'll get one if the EU agrees. That means the UK accepting the conditions they set out. It's not up to us.

    So what that does not mean it is right, just writing exaggerated headlines for effect.

    Thanks for just repeating exactly what I said on the transition deal ie May has said she will accept free movement and payments over that time. Many Leavers are up in arms over that but still not even one bit of gratitude from a hardcore Remainer like you, just yet more whinging!
  • @HYUFD It's the first shot. Whether it turns into a trade war depends on whether we fire back. You have to look at the Bombardier thing through the prism of Trump's Blitzkrieg renegotiation of NAFTA which is currently underway. It's a shot across the bows. Though the protectionist Trade War breaking out first on an intra anglosphere basis is of course hilarious.
  • I have to say I like Eddie George's approach to bad behaved rugby players. Obviously it is well documented that he dropped those who went boozing and haven't been reselected, but apparently for any infractions a player has to answer to a chosen senior player, who in the past has been Big Billy.

    I think most normal souls would shit themselves at the thought of having to go in front of him and explain their bad behaviour.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 33,646
    edited September 27

    @HYUFD It's the first shot. Whether it turns into a trade war depends on whether we fire back. You have to look at the Bombardier thing through the prism of Trump's Blitzkrieg renegotiation of NAFTA which is currently underway. It's a shot across the bows. Though the protectionist Trade War breaking out first on an intra anglosphere basis is of course hilarious.

    We won't be firing back to any significant degree, Canada on the other hand may well do

    Trump is already making noises on moving onto German goods soon and of course Chinese goods are also in his sights
  • stjohnstjohn Posts: 711

    I have to say I like Eddie George's approach to bad behaved rugby players. Obviously it is well documented that he dropped those who went boozing and haven't been reselected, but apparently for any infractions a player has to answer to a chosen senior player, who in the past has been Big Billy.

    I think most normal souls would shit themselves at the thought of having to go in front of him and explain their bad behaviour.

    Yes - but I guess that some of those players thought that Eddie's behaviour was a bit like that of "banker"?
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 3,881
    Yorkcity said:

    surbiton said:

    Chris_A said:

    So this international trade business is all going swimmingly, eh Brexiteers? How lucky we are to have that intellectual titan, Liam Fox, working on it and reassuring us how incredibly easy it's all going to be.

    We'll buy Boeing aircraft - duty free and we'll put 100% tariff on Airbus.
    Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.
    Something tells me that both the DUP and Sinn Féin are going to be a bit more willing to sit down around a table with the Westminster Government to discuss ending the current stalemate between them at the Conservative Conference. Not a good time for NI to be without a fully functioning devolved Parliament while this stalemate continues with the two main political parties whatever your politics!

    BBC News Northern Ireland - Is Stormont stalemate coming to an end?


  • Might need to give another 1bn to the DUP to keep them sweet.

    Something tells me that both the DUP and Sinn Féin are going to be a bit more willing to sit down around a table with the Westminster Government to discuss ending the current stalemate between them at the Conservative Conference. Not a good time for NI to be without a fully functioning devolved Parliament while this stalemate continues with the two main political parties whatever your politics!

    BBC News Northern Ireland - Is Stormont stalemate coming to an end?

    It is in neither the interest of the DUP nor that of Sinn Fein to banjax an agreement on the border. What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned. As for South-bound trade, the ball is in the EU's court." There is is the risk of illegal importation to the UK and there is the risk of illegal immigrants. That may be the price to pay for a friction-free border that unlocks the Brexit difficulties.

    Joseph
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 31,832
    JosephG said:

    What is to stop the UK addressing the border and saying, "Regardless of any agreemement - we'll keep on putting up with the fags smuggled across the border - we are imposing no tariffs, no customs duties, the CTA, and, accordingly we will impose no borders between NI and RoI - at least as far as goods and people passing North are concerned.

    The thing that stops them is Brexit. You know, control of our borders and free movement of people.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 31,832
    SeanT said:

    SNIP

    SeanT posts no. 4,736 in an occasional series

    "Why the calamity of Brexit is really the fault of those who warned against it, and really, really, really not the people who voted for it, OK?"
  • Apparently next week is Jos Buttler’s stag weekend.....
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,661
    I am confused.

    (1) How many seats for each party in each Land?
    (2) How are the overhang seats calculated, i.e. specifically what is the difference between the new method (which has just been introduced) and the old method?

    Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't have full details

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_2017

    ...and even the website which appears to be the official returning officer's results website seems to have alarming gaps in the actual results, e.g. it has percentages and votes for the parties but it doesn't seem to have the number of seats for each party, and doesn't have an easily accessible list of the constituencies. The only constituency results seem to be if you click on the map, or look in the list in the order in which they were declared (?!).

    https://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/en/bundestagswahlen/2017/ergebnisse.html

    Is there something badly wrong with this, or am I genuinely getting senile?
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,661
    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.
  • JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 19,797

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 13,797
    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
    That sounds like a very interesting piece of research. Do you know how much of the subsidy was direct financial aid and how much indirect, such as governments buying planes from the ‘local’ manufacturer with no effective competition?

    Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
  • rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
    The Economist takes a more cynical view, and also reminds us Boeing has done the same thing as regards pricing (the first few orders are sold at less than the cost of production, or seem to be until development and tooling costs are averaged over lots of orders), and Boeing is not directly hurt as it makes no planes this small so just wants to damage a foreign plane-maker.
    https://www.economist.com/news/business/21729469-row-between-planemakers-has-become-political-boeing-takes-flight-hypocrisy
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range.

    The danger is that this leads to tit-for-tat responses and an effective end to international aircraft competition. Which would be a loss for consumers everywhere.
    That sounds like a very interesting piece of research. Do you know how much of the subsidy was direct financial aid and how much indirect, such as governments buying planes from the ‘local’ manufacturer with no effective competition?

    Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
    You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:



  • Scott_P said:
    The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    Scott_P said:
    The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
    May may be creepy, but she hardly has a cult following!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 7,169

    Scott_P said:
    The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
    They might double down and get people to chant 'ohhhhhh Theresa May.'

    They'd look a bit stupid but that hasn't worried Labour.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 875

    Scott_P said:
    The question for betting purposes is whether this criticism of the Corbyn cult will mean CCHQ orders a shorter standing ovation for the Prime Minister next week.
    May may be creepy, but she hardly has a cult following!
    Careful now, Big G will put you in a Wicker Man.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    JohnLoony said:

    Meanwhile, the defence procurement row between Boeing and Bombardier seems to be caused ultimately by the Canadian government giving an unfair subsidy to Bombardier, resulting in a 219% tariff by the USA to level the playing field.

    Is that correct, or am I senile again?

    If correct, it's another example of how political preference and geographical favouritism gets in the way of making proper defence decisions based on which is best or most efficient. In other words, it's like Westland again. This time, the Heseltine is Justin Bieber throwing his toys out of the Trump.

    I'm no expert but I think you have summarised the American case against Bombadier, and the defence is that these arrangements are quite normal and used by Boeing as well. but others better informed should be along shortly.

    What it should remind us is that the American government is protectionist and plays hardball.. A free trade agreement with the United States should be regarded with great suspicion, especially when judged by American tribunals known for home-town decisions, and not lauded as a great prize of Brexit.
    There was an excellent research piece by the Alliance Bernstein Aerospace team about three years ago looking at subsidies in this sector. Basically, 4% of Boeing's revenues are subsidies from the US government in one form or another. EADS is about 5% from the EU and various European governments; Bombadier was 8% with the Quebec and Canadian governments weighing in and Embraer was 9%. We don't know exactly what the numbers are for the Chinese or the Russians, but it's likely to be in the 25-30% range

    Unfortunately this is one of these things that’s better for everyone if no-one does it, but bettter for each individual company if they do. It’s also a good example of the need for good independent arbitration in our trade agreement with the USA.
    You might find this twitter thread interesting by a former WTO official involved with aerospace:



    correction, Chris Kendall worked for the UK DTI on the aerospace dispute in the 90's, and later went on to start the CETA deal. His twitter threads on trade policy are very well sourced. Todays is not happy reading for Corbynites.


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 38,384
    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 22,424

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    Gay donkey man with fortress in Bulgaria please!
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,515

    Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    Gay donkey man with fortress in Bulgaria please!
    Fox, this isn't a dating site!
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Isn't the UKIP leadership decided today? That could prove more significant than would've been the case had things remained a little less turbulent.

    Gay donkey man with fortress in Bulgaria please!
    Anyone but the extreme racist please.

    Someone who is too racist for Nigel Farage shows you have a big problem.
This discussion has been closed.