Author Topic: UK General Election 2017  (Read 113500 times)

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17583
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1150 on: June 09, 2017, 07:35:49 PM »
I have no idea how that translates to university results ...
With all other factors accounted for students entering university with AAA from a private school have a 72% likelihood of attaining a first of 2i degree at the end of their studies. An equivalent AAA student from a state school has over 80% chance of getting a first or 2i. The differences exist for all other entry A-level grades, except the very top (i.e. 4 or more As).

The reason is obvious - if a student benefits from small class sizes etc at a private school they overachieve at A-level. Level the playing field at University and they under-perform compared to their state school counterparts.

Anchorman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16038
  • Maranatha!
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1151 on: June 09, 2017, 07:45:08 PM »
Dear Prof,


She can't, the next big question is Brexit and she is now a laughing stock in Europe, she must at all times go to parliament ( not the Tories ) on all decisions she makes regarding Brexit, her gamble for overall power failed.

Just to add, Ruth Davidson is now talking about a open brexit ( whatever that means ) and she is also quoted as saying we must talk to other parties regarding Brexit, is this the first sign she is throwing off her leaders shackles, distancing herself from a soon to be ex Prime Minister.

Gonnagle.


She's got a problem, our Ruthie, Gonners.
May is being propped up by a bunch of homophobic bigots from NI....and Davidson is a lesbian (claiming to be CofS with an RC girlfriend, and none the worse for that)
"for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12485
    • Preloved Ads
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1152 on: June 09, 2017, 07:47:25 PM »
Gabriella,

But they were at least costed – which more that can be said for the tory “menu without the prices” approach.

I brought this up in this thread and as I stated then, whilst I thought the Tories manifesto was pretty bland it wasn't that costly. Much of Labours programme, spend by taxing the top few % was according to the IFS a nonsense.

The Tories seemed wedded to catch phrases, 'magical money tree' which is a conclusion not an argument. The Tories seemed to surrender the economic argument, you would get an opponent attack with 'you planned to end deficit by 2015 but failed' they had no comebacks. Surely the obvious comeback is to challenge when they would end the deficit?

Do you really think Corbyn would have increased Corp Tax tax take by what Labour claimed?

Here is the IFS summary.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR4VYOqovsQ
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32498
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1153 on: June 09, 2017, 07:50:20 PM »
Labour last but won,

I've been reflecting on this all day.

In fact, no, Labour lost but they lost.

I think this result is actually a disaster for them. Everybody is praising Corbyn for narrowing the gap from 25 points  to virtually nothing, but everybody seems to have lost sight of the fact that, coming into this election, Labour was 25 points behind. It's like praising a football team that is five-nil down in the 80th minute for pulling the score back to 5-4. Yeah, they scored four goals but they previously shipped five. This is not good.

It's the same team that failed to hold the Conservative government to account for two years that is now being praised for losing not as badly as they might have done. Except now, of course, they cannot be booted out.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Rhiannon

  • Guest
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1154 on: June 09, 2017, 07:53:23 PM »
I agree, Jeremy. What we have now is the worst of all possible worlds. Hopefully another election will happen soon but if that returns a similar result then we are screwed.

The Accountant, OBE, KC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8989
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1155 on: June 09, 2017, 08:10:42 PM »
Gabriella,

Speaking as a former partner at one of the Big 4 accountancy firms, corporation tax is already largely discretionary given the ease with which it can be avoided – see Starbucks, Amazon etc. All you need do for example is house the Group's intellectual property rights in a low tax off-shore territory, then charge your UK subsidiary a shed load of royalties for using the company name, thereby reducing its taxable profit here.

Worth noting too that the plans for higher corporation tax would have applied to profits over £300k, so not affected most small businesses at all.
I think companies make a decision on where to invest based on post tax NPV and I would rather companies had spare funds to hire and train more employees. Most of my employable skills came from learning on the job.   

Quote
It’s also a lot about luck and happenstance – anyone can be a risk taker, but it’s dangerous to assume that those whose risks came good had any special insight. Either way though, I’m not sure how this relates to Labour’s corporation tax proposals?
Oh absolutely it's mostly luck. I don't think it is special insight - it's mostly tenacity and sheer bloody-mindedness to keep going and make it work by trying different things and networking to overcome obstacle after obstacle, sacrificing time with the family and your health in the process.

Quote
I don’t. Private and grammar schools privilege the wealthy over the less wealthy when there’s no corresponding relationship with intelligence and drive. While I might come some of the way with you about creating an educational system that enables everyone to achieve their potential, I don’t see what the size of your parents’ bank account has to do with it.

My “smart or driven” daughter incidentally went to a comprehensive school that offers the International Baccalaureate rather than “A” levels. She scored 45 points – the maximum possible, equivalent to five A* “A” levels. Did she not “achieve what they could have achieved in the private or grammar school system”?
Currently very few state schools offer IB. Your daughter did really well and was lucky to be at a school that offered her the option of working to her potential. I don't think the size of the parent's bank balance is the issue - both my kids are at private school but my younger daughter will probably achieve better exam results than my older daughter even though I will spend more on my older daughter by paying for extra tutoring outside of school for her. But I do notice that their private school demands higher standards of work and gives them harder work than my younger daughter was offered at State school. A state school that offers IB may be the exception - I have little experience of IB but I remember the Maths in an IB text book at a private school I visited looked pretty tough compared to A'Level Maths.

Quote
Dangerous things, generalisations.
Yes - that's why I was talking about my experience rather than generalising.

I identify as a Sword because I have abstract social constructs e.g. honour and patriotism. My preferred pronouns are "kill/ maim/ dismember"

Quite handy with weapons - available for hire to defeat money laundering crooks around the world.

“Forget safety. Live where you fear to live.” Rumi

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17583
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1156 on: June 09, 2017, 08:29:53 PM »
I brought this up in this thread and as I stated then, whilst I thought the Tories manifesto was pretty bland it wasn't that costly.
It included the most costly manifesto promise of any of the major parties. Leaving the single market and customs union and prioritising immigration over the economy in brexit.

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12485
    • Preloved Ads
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1157 on: June 09, 2017, 08:32:08 PM »
I've been reflecting on this all day.

In fact, no, Labour lost but they lost.

I think this result is actually a disaster for them. Everybody is praising Corbyn for narrowing the gap from 25 points  to virtually nothing, but everybody seems to have lost sight of the fact that, coming into this election, Labour was 25 points behind. It's like praising a football team that is five-nil down in the 80th minute for pulling the score back to 5-4. Yeah, they scored four goals but they previously shipped five. This is not good.

It's the same team that failed to hold the Conservative government to account for two years that is now being praised for losing not as badly as they might have done. Except now, of course, they cannot be booted out.

Agree and I'm puzzled by commentators suggesting Tory Brexit deal is off the table, article 50 is triggered, if they don't vote for the Tory deal that they forward then we will have no deal.
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Sebastian Toe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7719
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1158 on: June 09, 2017, 08:32:34 PM »
From18 April
Seb. Right on the money I see.
I'm delighted to be proved wrong!
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends.'
Albert Einstein

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17583
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1159 on: June 09, 2017, 08:33:51 PM »
I have little experience of IB but I remember the Maths in an IB text book at a private school I visited looked pretty tough compared to A'Level Maths.
The IB isn't harder than A-level - the issue with the IB is that it is broader, but actually rather less deep than A-levels.

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12485
    • Preloved Ads
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1160 on: June 09, 2017, 08:36:27 PM »
It included the most costly manifesto promise of any of the major parties. Leaving the single market and customs union and prioritising immigration over the economy in brexit.

My demonstrably hypocritical dishonest chum, freedom of movement of labour and a free trade deal, thought you were up for that? What did Labour promise is this regard?
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Gonnagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11106
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1161 on: June 09, 2017, 08:40:16 PM »
Dear Jeremyp,

Quote
I've been reflecting on this all day.

Can you reflect some more, I will, for me this is a complete disaster for the Tories, I honestly don't see any upside for the Tories, forget Corbyn and focus on the party that is in power, clinging on with their finger nails, hoping that the DUP will dig them out, read a post by Blue or the Prof, it is all here on our little forum.

Once again I will reiterate, Corbyn only needs to shutup now and watch as the Tories implode, he had a cracking Election campaign and no, I don't agree with all his policies but he is a honest decent man, and yes, that is something very unique in a politician.

Gonnagle.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/shop/shop-search.htm

http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Go on make a difference, have a rummage in your attic or garage.

ProfessorDavey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17583
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1162 on: June 09, 2017, 08:49:04 PM »
My demonstrably hypocritical dishonest chum, freedom of movement of labour and a free trade deal, thought you were up for that? What did Labour promise is this regard?
Oh here we go again - blind to the cost impact of the Tory manifesto, but instantly shifting the focus on the Labour manifesto.

We aren't talking about the Labour manifesto, but the Tory one - the Tories committed to remove us from the single market and customs union, said they'd be prepared to walk away with no trade deal and they committed to a cap on net migration of under 100,000 which necessaries prioritises numbers over economic needs.

What's the cost to the economy of those manifesto commitments - must be in the tens of billions per annum.

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12485
    • Preloved Ads
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1163 on: June 09, 2017, 09:50:30 PM »
Oh here we go again - blind to the cost impact of the Tory manifesto, but instantly shifting the focus on the Labour manifesto.

We aren't talking about the Labour manifesto, but the Tory one - the Tories committed to remove us from the single market and customs union, said they'd be prepared to walk away with no trade deal and they committed to a cap on net migration of under 100,000 which necessaries prioritises numbers over economic needs.

What's the cost to the economy of those manifesto commitments - must be in the tens of billions per annum.

Yes £6 billion as I recall if they lowered immigration, I don't believe they would though, a dog whistle to the very right of their party. According to Labour free-movement would end as well, so with regards to choosing between Labour / Tory how would Brexit would be relevant?

This is from the IFS.

Quote
Increasing rates will raise less revenue in the medium to long run because firms would respond by investing less in the UK. This in turn would depress economic activity and lead to fewer jobs and lower wages. There is a very high degree of uncertainty about how large these effects are but estimates suggest that they may be substantial. The potential size of these effects is an indication of why the OECD and others judge corporation tax to have a particularly damaging effect on economic growth.

https://election2017.ifs.org.uk/article/labour-s-reversal-of-corporate-tax-cuts-would-raise-substantial-sums-but-comes-with-important-trade-offs

Don't get me wrong the IFS were not particularly complimentary about the Tories, neither have I been on this thread, as I have already proved, despite your claims to the contrary, which is why you get the dishonest / hypocritical label applied to you. 

The impact of what the IFS says seems rather a lot!

I'm curious though, in terms of politics I'm a liberal on the authoritarian - liberal scale, and slightly right of centre of on the left - right scale. It expired in 2015 but my LibDem membership number is 04150100638, still got the card take a photo if you like.

I think you might be almost the same, perhaps left of centre, if we were being totally honest you should expect an honest poster to be critical of both sides. Yet I've done that, yet you haven't, curious. I'm quite happy with election result, think the Tories won't be able to do much, other than Brexit, there won't be another election for five years because they are shit scared of Corbyn now, and by the next one I can go back to LibDems.

If I were you, what I would do is say 'fair enough, you have not just been critical of Corbyn and the labour party over the last few weeks I was wrong, I still suspect you were "pretending" (why you would think I would pretend on an internet forum !?) but that is just my opinion can you please stop calling me a hypocrite and liar now'. I'll happily apologise lets call it a misunderstanding and move on.

Unless you want to dig some more?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 09:52:36 PM by jakswan »
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Humph Warden Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1164 on: June 09, 2017, 09:52:53 PM »
I agree, Jeremy. What we have now is the worst of all possible worlds. Hopefully another election will happen soon but if that returns a similar result then we are screwed.

Tezza is being propped up by Prod bigots?

Paisley must be laughing in hell.










Robbie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7512
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1165 on: June 09, 2017, 10:15:42 PM »
 :D
True Wit is Nature to Advantage drest,
          What oft was Thought, but ne’er so well Exprest

Humph Warden Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1166 on: June 09, 2017, 10:40:51 PM »
Tezza is being propped up by Prod bigots?

Paisley must be laughing in hell.

OK all together now


....."the sash my father wore..."

And NO I am not joking

Anchorman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16038
  • Maranatha!
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1167 on: June 09, 2017, 10:52:26 PM »
OK all together now


....."the sash my father wore..."

And NO I am not joking


I wish you were.
Those vermin infest the streets of many Scots towns in July.
I know the sectarian trash peddled by the DUP, and greet with horror May's desire to get into bed with them.
"for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

jakswan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12485
    • Preloved Ads
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1168 on: June 09, 2017, 11:05:55 PM »
Agree and I'm puzzled by commentators suggesting Tory Brexit deal is off the table, article 50 is triggered, if they don't vote for the Tory deal that they forward then we will have no deal.

Davey I trust we are back on semi-good terms after my olive branch.

Can you comment on this; re: Brexit May/Tories comes back with deal, the parliament don't vote for it we leave without a deal?

I suppose Parliament could vote to reverse it, not sure there would be enough of a majority for that to happen though given Corbyn is not exactly a die-hard remainer?
Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
- Voltaire

Ricky Spanish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3016
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1169 on: June 09, 2017, 11:45:02 PM »
"Nicola Sturgeon's party went from 56 MPs to 34 MPs. What happened?

One of the major surprises from last night’s general election was the SNP's fall from grace. In 2015 Nicola Sturgeon's party dominated the election in Scotland by winning 56 seats out of a possible 59. Only two years later, however, and this was reduced to 34 seats. The party also lost two of their biggest names in Westminster – deputy leader of the party Angus Robertson and former first minister Alex Salmond.

What lies behind these changing fortunes? Here are five important factors:

1. The election was fought on very different grounds in Scotland

Both the Conservatives and Scottish Labour chose to make the election about a second independence referendum, despite the Scottish Parliament already voting in favour of this in March this year. While the SNP won nearly all available seats in 2015, this was mainly because the pro-independence vote rallied behind one party, whereas the Unionist vote was split three ways between Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

In reality, such a large proportion of SNP MPs was never really representative of the country, and the only direction the SNP could go in this election was downwards. This time pro-Union voters were more strategic and backed the candidate that was best placed to beat the SNP. In many instances, this was the Conservative candidate, as the party has successfully positioned itself as the most strident defender of the Union under the leadership of Ruth Davidson.

2. The Conservatives had everything to gain and nothing to lose... and a lot of mysterious money.

Before the election, the Conservatives only had one MP in Scotland, and so could only hope to improve on their previous showing. Ruth Davidson ran a very good campaign and has proven herself to be a capable and effective leader. However, as openDemocracy revealed last week, there is another factor at play. Conservative election spending in Scotland has more than trebled in five years, and it is unclear who is bankrolling it. Households in Scotland are being flooded with Conservative propaganda in a way they never have never been before.

However, despite the Scottish "Tory surge", Davidson’s party still only won 29% of the vote, compared with 46% in England. While the Scottish Conservative vote is still significantly lower than in England, it was still enough to secure 13 seats.

The result is that the new landscape of MPs in Scotland more accurately reflects the politics of the country. However, this by no means signals the end of the SNP – Nicola Sturgeon’s party still won the election, taking more seats than all the other parties combined.

3. The SNP became complacent.

Nicola Sturgeon’s demand for a second independence referendum after the Brexit vote was poorly timed and did not go down well in some parts of the country. Many people who supported independence and voted SNP did so because they wanted to create a more progressive society. But the SNP have failed to live up to this – their programme in government has been underwhelming and their manifesto for the general election was lacklustre.

Faced with a more radical Corbyn-led Labour party, they were outflanked to the left and could no longer claim the moral high ground as they have been able to in the past. Despite Scottish Labour's attempts to distance themselves from Corbyn, and even undermine him, Corbyn's message and manifesto still cut through. This is to the great credit of Jeremy Corbyn and his effective election campaign.

4. There is limited loyalty to the SNP on the left.

One of the most dynamic parts of the Scottish electorate is the roughly 10% of voters who sit to the left of the SNP. This group tends to vote on the basis of progressive policy potential rather than party loyalty. In the 1999 Holyrood elections, this group voted Labour, and then went on to deliver 7 Green MSPs and 6 Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) MSPs in the 2003 election. In 2007 and 2011 they mainly backed the SNP, before flirting with the Greens again in 2016.

Generally speaking, this group of people voted Yes in the 2014 independence referendum because they saw it as a left-wing option. However, they have little affinity or loyalty to the SNP or its leader.

It is likely that Jeremy Corbyn’s unashamedly social democratic manifesto was a major draw for these voters, and some of them may have voted for Labour at the expense of the SNP.

5. The Brexit factor.

It is often forgotten that a third of SNP voters backed Brexit in the EU referendum last year. While official data has yet to be released, it is possible that some of these people abandoned the SNP in order to vote for a party that was more committed to Brexit, such as the Conservatives, or, potentially, Labour. Whether or not this diminishes their support for Scottish independence remains to be seen."

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/laurie-macfarlane/five-reasons-why-snp-lost-seats-in-general-election
UNDERSTAND - I MAKE OPINIONS. IF YOUR ARGUMENTS MAKE ME QUESTION MY OPINION THEN I WILL CONSIDER THEM.

Humph Warden Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1170 on: June 10, 2017, 12:44:48 AM »

I wish you were.
Those vermin infest the streets of many Scots towns in July.
I know the sectarian trash peddled by the DUP, and greet with horror May's desire to get into bed with them.

This is aint a joke.


Humph Warden Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1171 on: June 10, 2017, 12:51:08 AM »

Humph Warden Bennett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1172 on: June 10, 2017, 01:21:41 AM »
Come on now, somebody better me

Walt Zingmatilder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33187
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1173 on: June 10, 2017, 09:29:07 AM »
I brought this up in this thread and as I stated then, whilst I thought the Tories manifesto was pretty bland it wasn't that costly. Much of Labours programme, spend by taxing the top few % was according to the IFS a nonsense.

The Tories seemed wedded to catch phrases, 'magical money tree' which is a conclusion not an argument. The Tories seemed to surrender the economic argument, you would get an opponent attack with 'you planned to end deficit by 2015 but failed' they had no comebacks. Surely the obvious comeback is to challenge when they would end the deficit?

Do you really think Corbyn would have increased Corp Tax tax take by what Labour claimed?

Here is the IFS summary.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR4VYOqovsQ
Spot on about the catchphrases or hypnotic mantras as I call them but then that reflects the appalling view by the Tories of the electorate as the disgruntled family dog easily soothed by a few words.

May had a surefire success Brexit with which to argue. It should have been hammered how important these negotiations were, the opposition faced, the skills needed etc.

May and the Tories failed to do this.
Secondly they should have explained when other issues would be discussed and what concessions the electorate could expect in return for loyalty.

There should have been no novelty in the manifesto if Brexit was the issue.

Because this can from start to finish be written down as Tory incompetence they now have no claim whatsoever to be what the country needs to negotiate Brexit.

The Tories showed no urgency on the Brexit issue instead concentrating on how the Tory culture would be moved on. That Tory social and economic culture was prime over Brexit which lets face it ,for them, could go anyway was illustrated yesterday in the amazing energy and animation Theresa May found yesterday for the purposes of saving her own arse.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2017, 09:42:12 AM by Emergence-The musical »

Ricky Spanish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3016
Re: UK General Election 2017
« Reply #1174 on: June 10, 2017, 09:58:46 AM »
Is this what you are looking for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAbh0uMDcY

BTW way Swannie - Traffic is so fuckin' low on this site these days that I'm sure enabling YouTube player won't make any dent on bandwidth...
UNDERSTAND - I MAKE OPINIONS. IF YOUR ARGUMENTS MAKE ME QUESTION MY OPINION THEN I WILL CONSIDER THEM.