UK Politics V

[MinDonner]

Cos the other thread just overtopped 400.

Anyone know how the odds are looking at the bookies'? I'd look, but my job is likely to be in danger whoever gets in, so looking at gambling sites is probably not the wisest thing I could be doing right now....

[mormont]

New thread, same arguments. :)

Worries me even more. That all those people are in for a massive WTF moment Friday morning.

I don't think so: I think most people are very much aware that the cuts will be much worse than the politicians are prepared to admit. They just don't know where they will fall, mostly because all three party leaders have spent the campaign talking about tax cuts and preserving spending on this, that, and the next thing.

Also there's certianly enough power in the Unions to cause plenty of mayhem.

There will certainly be some strikes, but I doubt there'll be anything I'd call 'mayhem'. The last time anything like that happened was what, the poll tax riots?

[MinDonner]

From the Glasgow Herald: “Every time David Cameron looks like he might win,” said the golf club philosopher, “the volcano gets angry.”

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Cos the other thread just overtopped 400.

Anyone know how the odds are looking at the bookies'? I'd look, but my job is likely to be in danger whoever gets in, so looking at gambling sites is probably not the wisest thing I could be doing right now....

I just had a look on OddsChecker, and there are so many topics that I'm thoroughly confused.

Basics, though:

Best odds for Conservatives winning the most seats is 1/10.

Same for Labour: 9.

And for LibDems: 100.

Best odds for a hung Parliament: 5/6.

And against: also 5/6. (same company, even.)

Best odds on BNP winning a seat (yes/no format): 7/2.

For the UKIP: 4.

Of course, these are all "best odds" samplings, and not actually necessarily "what is likely to happen". :P I do love that newspaper quote, though.

[Lummel]

On Friday morning the discussions will only just be starting as to who is going to form a government. Friday is way too early for us to be hearing about definite cuts.

[paddington]

I am overly pessimistic and tend to look at the worst that can happen. An freely admit that my view of what could happen is possibly as unrealistic as people who believe every-things fine. I have enough food and water stored to last awhile if needs be.

So all things being equal you probably right Mormont :blush:

However I don't feel its in the realms of fantasy to feel a little worried, with the emphasis on this election being allot talk about immigration. An raising tension between some parts of the British community and other sections.

Maybe mayhem is to strong a word, but certainly some general unpleasantness. I do feel that some people are as unrealistically optimistic as i am pessimistic

[Hereward]

People were indeed unhappy with the Thatcher cuts. But Darling has already admitted that even under Labour, the cuts will need to dwarf the Thatcher cuts.

[Hereward]

I don't think so: I think most people are very much aware that the cuts will be much worse than the politicians are prepared to admit. They just don't know where they will fall, mostly because all three party leaders have spent the campaign talking about tax cuts and preserving spending on this, that, and the next thing.

I think you're right that people know the cuts will be worse than those admitted to, but I also know that there was a recent opinion poll which showed a majority of people thought the deficit could be eliminated by "efficiency savings", so they are not even remotely aware of what the scale will actually be.

You're right about the party leaders, but that's a symptom of the difference between voters saying they want to be told the truth and then savagely punishing parties that tell them the truth. The parties can all see what happened to the Tories' polling figures when they started to talk about the age of austerity and none of them want to go there..

[mormont]

I can't find it now, but the Economist recently had an interesting poll about this. It suggested that people's realism about cuts, and their attitude to them, varied by the area. Most people, for example, strongly supported protecting defence spending, until you reminded them of the consequences for other spending that impacted on them: but people tended to be in favour of increases on alcohol taxation, even when it was put in terms of the impact on them personally. I'll see if I can find it.

[Hereward]

I can't find it now, but the Economist recently had an interesting poll about this. It suggested that people's realism about cuts, and their attitude to them, varied by the area. Most people, for example, strongly supported protecting defence spending, until you reminded them of the consequences for other spending that impacted on them: but people tended to be in favour of increases on alcohol taxation, even when it was put in terms of the impact on them personally. I'll see if I can find it.

Yes, I saw that, too. Thirty per cent were strongly in favour of cutting services to reduce the deficit, but less than 20% were in favour if there was an effect on the services they use, for instance. Over 80% wanted more money spent on the equipment of troops in Afghanistan, but only 45% if that meant less spent on other public services.

[mormont]

Found it. You really need to read the full version (PDF), I think, because the headline figures the article uses are the 'strongly agree' ones, and in some cases part of that drop is down to people moving from 'strongly agree' to 'tend to agree'. That shows more reluctant support, but not (I would argue) a drop in support.

The results on taxing air travel and alcohol are interesting, because it's those areas that the percentage in favour actually increases when the effect on respondents themselves is emphasised, although this could be a wish to present themselves as 'virtuous'. It's also interesting that the results seem to chime with Tory policy on the face of it - more local control of services, more voluntary involvement, etc. - but that this support drops off a bit when you make it more concrete.

[MinDonner]

Obviously the cuts have started already with a reduction on punctuation use Its going to be a tough few years isnt it

I thought I was joking. Evidently not.

[Lummel]

Not really suprising although I did find the percentage of those opposed to increases in the price of air travel interesting.

Problem is any budget cuts or tax rises will depend on how politically strong the government formed after the election will be. Extending asset life expectancies and not replacing retiring civil servants isn't going to save enough.

How much more spending can be moved PFI style off the budget sheet? Council tax revaluation anyone?

[paddington]

Seems a lot of people are very happy for other people to volunteer. People are also happy for public services cuts that effect other people.

[Lummel]

I thought I was joking. Evidently not.

Save early, save often.

[mormont]

Not really suprising although I did find the percentage of those opposed to increases in the price of air travel interesting.

It's about an even split on that issue, but as I said it inclines towards the 'pro' side more when you mention personal cost.

Problem is any budget cuts or tax rises will depend on how politically strong the government formed after the election will be.

I think people exaggerate the extent to which this is true. Whichever party wins, no matter how slim their majority or tenuous their coalition, the opposition are going to be in no real state to put them under pressure. Labour would be fighting like cats in a sack over the succession, the Tories would be in complete disarray at losing their fourth election in a row. That gives any government a head start. It will also be difficult for either party to credibly claim the cuts aren't necessary, since almost all the experts will likely be saying that they actually don't go far enough.

Seems a lot of people are very happy for other people to volunteer. People are also happy for public services cuts that effect other people.

In that respect, I prefer to look at the glass as half full. ;) The total of those who 'strongly agree' or 'tend to agree' with cuts, even when the cuts affect them personally, is almost half.

[Lummel]

Whichever party wins, no matter how slim their majority or tenuous their coalition, the opposition are going to be in no real state to put them under pressure.

For sure, but how easy is it going to be for a Conservative or Labour led government to unite around an austerity programme after such a tight election? Aren't we going to see some disagreements expressed over the leadership and the campaign? The victors are going to have to find some kind of (cheap) way to shore up support within their own party.

[VarysTheSpider]

For anyone staying up into the wee hours tomorrow, this will be handy.

[mormont]

For sure, but how easy is it going to be for a Conservative or Labour led government to unite around an austerity programme after such a tight election? Aren't we going to see some disagreements expressed over the leadership and the campaign? The victors are going to have to find some kind of (cheap) way to shore up support within their own party.

True, there will undoubtedly be internal battles. Not limited to the budget, either. Even if Labour win, I can't see Brown hanging on: he is too damaged for even an improbable stumble over the finish line to save him. If the Tories win, well, much of their new intake is significantly Eurosceptic (how many times have we said that before?). The good news for them, though, is that most of that new intake actually favour more spending cuts. The bad news is that they favour more tax cuts, too.

[Usotsuki]

The victors are going to have to find some kind of (cheap) way to shore up support within their own party.

外圧 or outside pressure.

The LDP raised this technique to a fine art over the years, if you need to introduce policies that will alienate a large percentage of your population encourage the belief that this is a necessary response to an external demand.

In Japan we see:

I would rather choke on my own vomit than allow imports of American beef but I have no choice. However as a doughty champion of the people I have saved you from having to eat horrible Thai rice as well as that nasty American beef.

And in the UK, as if on some kind of remote control from Cameron's battle-bus, we have:

Niall Ferguson already calling on the incoming Conservative government (tad premature there, Empire Boy) to reach an immediate understanding with the IMF.