You are obviously unaware that Miliband ruled out a coalition with the SNP a month ago :
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/ed-miliband-rules-out-a-coalition-with-the-snp-10111058.html ]Ed Miliband rules out coalition with the SNP [/url]
I can assure you that Nicola Sturgeon is better informed than you appear to be.
The best bit was when Millibland landed the sturgeon hook, line and sinker.
He lay in wait until she said she wanted a coalition with labour and he point blank refused!
Aye, that was really clever, ruling out working with the SNP. The one wee flaw is that means letting the Tories back in but hey, at least he stuck to his principles eh?
Back in the real world, no-one was talking about a Lab/SNP coalition anyway, the proposal is a Labour minority government with SNP supporting it on the Budget and confidence motions. And no-one, not even Ed Miliband, has ruled that out. Because he can't.
Back in the real world, no-one was talking about a Lab/SNP coalition anyway,
No, really!
The innocence of that interpretation warms the heart. Not too many historians about to ask, "why, where, when etc...."
the proposal is a Labour minority government with SNP supporting it on the Budget and confidence motions.
It's all sounds so simple.
And no-one, not even Ed Miliband, has ruled that out. Because he can't.
The pull of power trumps everything as Cleggy discovered.
Now if the dangerous ones put Angus Robertson out a bit more, the whole thing could become marginally tolerable. Obvious BS aside at least he avoids the head bobbing and shaking and staged vitriol etc.
The Plaid and Green leaders are just chancers 'having a go' in my opinion, they would be completely oout of their depth in any government situation, I wouldn't trust them to run a 100 metres!
Could you explain what you mean here I dont get it.
cinnamon_girl - Member
Anyone know why Clegg wasn't there?
sucking off cameron ?.......
bencooper - Member
He lay in wait until she said she wanted a coalition with labour and he point blank refused!
Aye, that was really clever, ruling out working with the SNP. The one wee flaw is that means letting the Tories back in but hey, at least he stuck to his principles eh?
There's a difference between a coalition and working with the SNP on a vote by vote basis - the latter will happen if Labour get enough seats to be a minority govt or a small majority.
Which was the point I made in my second paragraph 😉
teamhurtmore - Member
You simply have to look at the evidence. It's very clear unless you are a xenophobe.The available research further shows that any adverse wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants. This is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers. Manacorda, Manning and Wadsworth (2012) analyse data from 1975-2005 and conclude that the main impact of increased immigration is on the wages of migrants already in the UK.
Firstly your evidence says 'likely to be greatest' and 'main impact' which is hardly definitive.
Secondly and my main problem with it is that it is NOT OK that immigration keeps the wages low of migrants already here! Only a xenophobe would think it is OK.
The funniest thing from the Debate was Ed saying "Debate me, debate me David, just me and you"
The little ray of sunshine that is IDS has just ruled out not just a Tory coalition with any other parties, but also any ad hoc, vote by vote arrangements.
This whole election campaign is now an utter farce. They're all manoeuvring for the inevitable hung parliament, while Implausibly claiming theyre not. And the manifestos aren't manifestos at all. They're just a starting point for negotiations.
Alex Salmond, where is he ? The SNP aren't daft they know how poisonous he is to voters outside Scotland so he's being kept away from the national coverage only to be rolled out as leader of the SNP at Westminster.
@binners, I think the Tories will look at another LibDem coalition or will try and govern with a minority government counting that some LibDems/DUP/UKIP etc will vote with them on certain issues but without a formal coalition. I am also firmly of the view that these opinion pools are largely worthless, they are so easily manipulated. A surprise majority is not out of the question.
CTK - feel free to go an read the research. What you will find is that immigration actually has very little impact on wages at all (unless you are a xenophobe) and if anything it increases them - a little thing called supply and demand for labour. Its juts that this doesn't suit the blame the immigrant narrative that UKIP and others depend on. But it is not clear cut and there are losers - including previous immigrants. Whether that is right or wrong is a different debate altogether...
The available research further shows that any adverse wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are themselves migrants. This is because the skills of new migrants are likely to be closer substitutes for the skills of migrants already employed in the UK than for those of UK-born workers. Manacorda, Manning and Wadsworth (2012) analyse data from 1975-2005 and conclude that the main impact of increased immigration is on the wages of migrants already in the UK.
Quote from TMH and my view exactly. Those at greatest risk from immigrant labour are the prior generation of immigrants as its their jobs which are undercut. This is well understood.
Alex Salmond, where is he ? The SNP aren't daft they know how poisonous he is to voters outside Scotland so he's being kept away from the national coverage only to be rolled out as leader of the SNP at Westminster.
Well at the moment he isn't anything other than a MP candidate, he's not leader of anything. Though, if he does get elected and heads to Westminster with dozens of other SNP MPs, it'll be very entertaining to watch.
I think if Alex Wanders in to Westminster as kingmaker in a coalition, then a massively dangerous critical mass of self-regarding, preening smugness will be reached, that could endanger the future of humanity itself!
I'm sick to death of hearing about this bloody election - especially as I can't influence the results in any way and yet the outcome is bound to have some (probably negative) effect on me.
Alex Salmond has already said that Angus Robertson will remain the SNP leader in Westminster.
But it is not clear cut and there are losers - including previous immigrants. Whether that is right or wrong is a different debate altogether...
There is no debate about this point- it is wrong- only a xenophobe would think otherwise 😀
So basically the rich get richer and the poor get poorer on the back of migrant labour.
I think the Tories will look at another LibDem coalition or will try and govern with a minority government counting that some LibDems/DUP/UKIP etc
No doubt they will but it'll be pointless if the numbers don't add up. [url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/16/in-the-election-numbers-game-the-odds-are-stacked-against-cameron ]Interesting, if bleedingly obvious analysis[/url] in grauniad this morning. Basically the tories are screwed as the Libdems look like losing so many seats to labour and the SNP that the tories have no hope of taking back as many seats off labour to make up the shortfall. It'll be quite ironic if the tories selfish and narrowminded sidelining of their coalition partners results in their own demise.
CTK - again, go and read the research, it will help with the confusion. But little clue, the evidence is that immigration has very little impact on wages - its a convenient red herring. You can interpret that as you see fit.
The Plaid and Green leaders are just chancers 'having a go' in my opinion, they would be completely oout of their depth in any government situation, I wouldn't trust them to run a 100 metres!
Could you explain what you mean here I dont get it.
They are a couple of 'have a go' politicians who have somehow found themselves leaders of their parties.
Neither of them have the talent not intelligence to be allowed anywhere near number 10.
(In my opinion for what it's worth).
Neither of them have the talent not intelligence to be allowed anywhere near number 10.
Talent and intelligence are irrelevant. It's not like there's an exam they have to take. Maybe there should be but that's a different debate. The only thing they need are votes. That's it I'm afraid.
Neither of them have the talent not intelligence to be allowed anywhere near number 10.
I think the leader of Plaid Cymru has the intelligence to work out that since her party doesn't stand candidates outside Wales she will never take up residence in Number 10.
I just got some election literature through from our local UKIP candidate. In the spirit of democracy I read it. It's fair to say that intelligence wasn't the first word that sprang to mind.
The general tone was the same as that I see from a group of old regulars in my local, who can often be overheard using phrases like 'it's them bloody ****'s'. He even looks like Al Murray in full pub landlord guise.
He's kindly supplied me with a poster I can put in my window, to proudly proclaim 'I'm backing UKIP'
Very thoughtful!
teamhurtmore - MemberCTK - again, go and read the research, it will help with the confusion.
I've read the research which you choose to quote from and it makes the point that immigration can result in making rich people richer and poor people poorer. Perhaps you should read it again to help with your "confusion"? There's a clue in "a little thing called supply and demand for labour".
How does the BBC allow someone to pose the question about immigration and pressure on public services? Complete xenophobic nonsense.
Because it's a significant meme (in the proper sense of the word) in British politics and it's a question the PM will need to deal with. If they're going to wholeheartedly agree with the proposition, you need to know now; and if they're going to completely palm the underlying assumptions, it's time for them to spit it out.
It's fair to say that intelligence wasn't the first word that sprang to mind.
I was genuinely surprised with how badly Farage preformed last night. For someone who is reputed to be a man of the people who has the common touch it was breathtakingly stupid of him to have, completely unnecessarily, attacked the audience.
I know some claim that with falling support in the opinion polls for UKIP Farage is aiming merely to shore up UKIP's remaining support and not looking at winning friends or attracting new support, but that strategy in itself is pretty dumb as the UKIP is only predicted to win 2 seats (exactly the same as it had before Parliament was dissolved) given its current level of support in the opinion polls.
They desperately need to win a significant increase in support, approaching the level they received in the EU election when they were the largest party, and the seats will start rolling in.
Farage seems to have given up weeks before the general election.
Farage shares a problem common to many politicians - he's had very little experience talking to people who don't agree with him.
1) The Plaid leader got destroyed by a student on Radio 1 earlier this week. Embarrassing wasn't the word.
2) Farage isn't appealing to lefty voters so attacking the event last night for being a left wing stitch up, probably won't lose votes from UKIP voters.
3) The way things are looking currently no one will be able to hold together a majority, Stirling will tank off a cliff and we could all end up voting again shortly and be worse off overall.
4) Anyone know if Greece are likely to fall out of the Euro before the election? As that could shake things up somewhat. Still plenty of time for events to change the result.
Thanks for the advice Ernie. Oddly enough, I did read it. But yet again perspective is what is required rather than strangling evidence to create false points.
The main conclusions - little if any significant impact on employment or wages. Main drivers are other factors - really?!? Where's the feather to knock me over with?
Better not tell Nige, he's struggling enough just now.
4) Anyone know if Greece are likely to fall out of the Euro before the election? As that could shake things up somewhat. Still plenty of time for events to change the result.
I was discussing this earlier today. Grexit pressure becoming more and more obvious. Preparations to limit the damage are now broadly in place. Greek bond yields going north. So who, if anyone, would benefit from the subsequent volatility? Probably those with a euro sceptic tendency.
THM- I'm not confused thanks. You seem to be missing my point.
If one aspect of immigration is to drive down the wages of migrants already here then surely this aspect of immigration is a bad thing for the country.
@ben, that's all deliberate to keep him out of the public eye for the reasons I said, he's toxic in he UK. There's no doubt he'll be the leader/spokesperson of the Westminster SNP group. Labour are indeed in a tricky place, the perception they sided with the Tories in the referendum (hats off to the SNP for spinning that one) has been very bad for them in Scotland and any deal with the SNP post an election will be equally bad for them in England.
@dragon - Greece is unlikely to formally fall out of the euro by May 7th, not least as I think they will back down as an exit will be catastrophic for the country and not what the Syriza supporters want. Also payment timing is such they can probably struggle on a bit - they have been raiding private pensions for example. Things are looking quite dodgy though, story today that Greek bank subsiduaries in other EU countries have been told they cannot hold Greek bonds or put money on deposit with their head office in Greece in both cases as the risk of default is too great.
Perhaps, perhaps not. Its bad news for those concerned though.
But the evidence on immigration points - at the country level that you are interested in - to a marginal positive impact on wages. As in most things - winners and losers at the individual level though.
So we should be focusing on issues that matter and supported by evidence not UKIP make believe. Still we prefer to describe things as taxes when they are not, mix debt and deficit at will, and bandy "austerity" around with gay abandon. Is there an election on? 😉
dragon - Member2) Farage isn't appealing to lefty voters so attacking the event last night for being a left wing stitch up, probably won't lose votes from UKIP voters.
Even when it's pointed out to him that the audience was selected not by the BBC but by an independent polling company on the bases of a representative sample of British voters?
Farage was in effect attacking a cross section of British opinion, the British pubic in other words.
UKIP is losing support, I'm unlikely to be the only one who thought his attack of the audience was unwarranted and counterproductive. The principle aim of the party leaders in last night's debate was to win greater support for their parties, [i]"probably won't lose votes from UKIP voters"[/i] is a poor justification for Farage's outburst.
If one aspect of immigration is to drive down the wages of migrants already here then surely this aspect of immigration is a bad thing for the country.
@cbk it's complicated good vs bad.
Lower wages are bad for the prior generation of immigrants. They are good for the businesses/employer in terms of lower costs/greater profits. Perhaps good for the consumer who can buy a product more cheaply if the businesses reduces it prices. Bad for the country in that lower wages probably leads to higher welfare costs and a lower tax base on which to provide public services.
Even when it's pointed out to him that the audience was selected not by the BBC but by an independent polling company on the bases of a representative sample of British voters?
Who says ICM selected the audience on that basis and who says the audience applicants filled their profile forms in honestly ? I understand the vocal support for the SNP was quite strong in the room, interesting that given the event was in Westminster
Farage shares a problem common to many politicians - he's had very little experience talking to people who don't agree with him.
Like!
To be fair most politicians have far more experience talking to people who don't agree with them than the average person. It kind of goes with the territory.
@daz - its very hard to turn these polls (where they ask around 1000 people) into potential results at the GE. UKIP poll 14% but will get 2-4 seats. LibDems poll 7% and will probably get 30-40 seats. There are some very local effects and in any case the polls require people to tell the truth about how they voted last time and how they intend to vote in May. That's why this election is so hard to call. All to play for.
Farage's estimates for spending don't seem to cater for a drop in GDP caused by leaving the EU. Is there likely to be one?
Hard to say @molgrips, there could be arguments both ways. Could be a big uptick in corporation tax by declaring all tax treaties with Lux and Ireland void for example, extra taxes on online stores outside the UK ? More businesses locating back to the UK ?
I personally think there would be a drop in the short term due to uncertainty but all the scrambling around and re-organization would create an uptick in business for accountants and lawyers for example. Longer term hard to say as that would be dependent upon the trade pacts which would be negotiated, Germans are still going to want to sell us lots of cars.
That's why this election is so hard to call. All to play for.
I agree actually, everyone assumes a hung parliament is a foregone conclusion but I wouldn't be at all surprised if one side ends up with a tiny overall majority. having said that, it looks very unlikely, and in the event of a hung parliament, the tories are looking very isolated.
He must have a bloody boring time then!
I'm sick to death of hearing about this bloody election - especially as I can't influence the results in any way and yet the outcome is bound to have some (probably negative) effect on me.
This. St. Helens North is such a solid Labour seat that they don't really have to try. I'll still vote but to be honest it is absolutely pointless. Shave a chimp, pin a red rosette on it and it would still get a massive majority.
