carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 20, 2019 17:31:20 GMT
TM needs to send tanks to parliment to prevent a coup taking place. MPs allowed out but nobody allowed in. I hope this is a joke - this is ridiculous and reckless language. There is no sense in which any sort of "coup" is taking place, and if you think there is then you might like to read up on coups from history (hint: they often start with tanks being sent to Parliaments).
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 20, 2019 17:27:43 GMT
"Two-round questions - first, whether voters accept or reject the deal. Then, if it’s rejected, whether they want to remain or leave without a deal. You could also ask the questions in a different order if you wanted.
Remain vs Theresa May’s deal vs no deal - Voters would be able to choose between any of the three options. But this would split the Leave vote, leaving Remain to almost certainly win. Most unsustainably, it could even produce a Remain win when the majority of people actually vote for Leave options. Democratically, this is a non-starter and would reasonably be seen as a stitch-up. Three-way preferential voting - You could ask the three-way question and give voters the options of ranking the options, then tally them up using an alternative vote (AV). This is practically the same as two-round voting and has the same problem – no deal is on the ballot.
There are also extra problems, such as the fact that AV can produce some quite unintuitive results – and the fact that the system was explicitly rejected for parliamentary elections at a referendum in 2011, so its use would certainly be contested."
Fortunately, no-one has ever seriously proposed a three way first past the post referendum - it exists solely as a straw man to be beaten down in articles such as this. I notice the description of three-way preferential voting claims it is virtually the same as two-round, but in fact it is not, and does not have the same fatal flaws I highlighted in my previous post.
The only plausible method for a three choice referendum would be preference voting. The alternative, more sensible, option would be two-way, May's deal vs Remain.
As for agent69 request for an example, the decision by the conservative government in 2017 to call a general election springs immediately to mind.
EDIT: As for getting no-deal off the table, this can be done straightforwardly by passing a bill stating that the default position if no deal is reached by 28/3 is to immediately issue a revocation of the article 50 notification. There is no question this is possible, it is simply viewed as politically undesireable by some, which is not at all the same thing.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 20, 2019 15:35:52 GMT
1. Should the country
-Leave -Remain 2. If the country ends up leaving, should it be via -May's deal -No deal
Putting May's hugely rejected deal as a Leave option is a falsehood -many Leave voters won't go for it, even though they want to Leave -parliament has already shown it won't support it.
OR
have a general election, this time with clear manifesto promises on Brexit that are deliverable. I believe that would come down to no-deal Leave or Remain, as there's no evidence anything else can get through the HoC (May can't get her deal Leave through and Labour's Leave-with-all-current-benefits is never going to happen).
This is a bad design of referendum question. Two binary questions can at most distinguish between four different preference orderings. However, with three possible outcomes there are six possible preference orderings, and therefore this style of referendum can never correctly distinguish between them. In this particular case, for example there is no way to correctly express the preference of May's deal > remain > no deal. As for a General Election, this has several problems, but which largely boil down to the fact that elections are not designed to select individual policies. People vote in general elections for all sorts ofreasons and relying on a general election to specifically resolveh the issue of brexit seems a nonstarter. It also rests on the assumption that a party would win a majority, which is not at all clear. Finally, of course, the nature of first past the the post means that thenumber of sseats a party wins bears no relation to the proption of votes they get.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 20, 2019 14:28:20 GMT
Well, if we're playing this game: "Remain is 12 points ahead of Leave in new poll of how Britons would vote in a second Brexit referendum after May's crushing defeat" Not said by some left wing newspaper, but by the "Daily Mail" (good for them).
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 17, 2019 11:23:59 GMT
Are you able to expand on the line "Capital gains on this property are capped at 5% pa over the term of the investment under our regulatory permissions." in the description of the current property? In particular I'm keen to know details of how the cap amount is applied. Is it a 5% cap applied each year, or is it 5% for each year the property runs, applied at the end (and will this be 25% or 27.6%)? Does the cap include the initial discount? Are capital losses similarly bounded at 5% per year? What happens to funds above the cap? I also notice that throughout the website mention is made of receiving the capital gains from the sale of the property at the end of term, without any suggestion that there is a cap. e.g. on the "How it works" page: emphasis mine. Is the quote (and other similar ones throughout the website) incorrect, or does the cap specifically only apply to the first property? Separately, in the FAQ is the question "Will I need to invest more cash at a later date?". The first sentence of the answer is: again, emphasis mine. This suggests that in fact there do exist situations in which such contributions might have to be made. Can you provide further information about what they are?
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 11, 2019 10:46:48 GMT
Note that the monthly pay in is not a *net* pay in. You can simply transfer money in and out.
As it is, the only current account I'm aware of that does not require a pay in is Tesco Bank, which pays 3% up to £3000. However, I think it requires three direct debits to br paid out.
Alternatives are:
TSB Classic Plus (5% up to 1500, 500 monthly) Nationwide Flexdirect (5% up to 2500, 1000 monthly, rate lasts for one year)
EDIT: the switching offers are also dead easy to do, and generally pay more up front than you would expect in a year of interest from one of these accounts.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 6, 2019 16:58:44 GMT
carolus Perhaps you should get a job editing readers' comments on The Guardian, enough abuse on there to keep you busy for life. Perhaps true that in the end I'm just howling at the moon. I remain hopeful that this forum could have a higher standard of discourse than the general internet, however.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 6, 2019 16:41:48 GMT
This is an unfortunate choice of phrase, which a lot of people would find deeply upsetting or offensive. However, I’m sure you have only used this out of ignorance as to the historical context, and not out of malice. As such, I thought it might help if I described briefly why it’s a problematic choice.
In English the term “Reich” is used to refer to Germany under the Nazi regime of 1933-1945. This was a totalitarian dictatorship, who brutally suppressed political, economic and social freedoms during the 12 years they were in power. The Nazi regime subscribed to a murderous ideology of violence, repression and military force, both internally and externally. The “Reich” was the attempt to construct a Nazi empire, spanning Europe and then the globe.
In 1938, Austria was annexed. In early 1939, so was Czechoslovakia, followed by parts of Lithuania. Finally, the invasion of Poland in September resulted in the formal declaration of war between Nazi Germany and Britain and France. This was the beginning of a large war, known as the Second World War. By the end of the war in 1945, over 70 million people had died, and most of Europe lay in ruins.
During this time, Nazi Germany perpetrated the worst genocide the world has seen. Six million European Jews were systematically executed between 1941 and 1945 in a genocide known as the Holocaust. Additionally, the Nazi regime conducted systematic campaigns of murder, starvation and torture against millions of other civilians in occupied territories.
I hope this, very brief, summary is enough to indicate to you why it is deeply inappropriate to use language which compares the European Union (a peaceful, democratic collaboration of individual nations) to the vile Nazi regime. I would urge you in future to think very carefully about such language. The words we use matter.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 6, 2019 14:54:22 GMT
Do you think they would sell shares at the reduced price though? i think there was the opportunity to express interest in buying more shares at the 30-day exit value that was being given to exiting investors. Yes, the email on 6/12/18 offered the opportunity to "stay updated on buying more shares at the 4-week valuation". I clicked through to do so, but haven't heard anything further yet. I'm at least interested enough to consider it, but obviously would depend on what the actual valuations given end up being.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 4, 2019 12:25:01 GMT
3. Investment offering
Firstly investors can own a share in a specific property (in a similar way to that of Property Partner that you currently use - please get in touch if you would like to understand how we differ as a business) Hi britishpearl, thanks for the posts in this thread, lots of useful information. I was wondering if you'd be able to expand a bit on the differences between you and Property Partner that you mention here?
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Jan 2, 2019 9:39:38 GMT
All the Poles I know are really keen on the EU. I've just returned from Gdansk which boasts a premium EU funded Solidarity Centre for a few favoured switched on apparatchiks while the rest of the land is in a shite state. Rather like the EU projects in the UK which are all wind and piss, while workers languish with no incentive. Eastern Europe hopes the EU come through with funding and save them from Putin, but its a thin hope, as history and geog. indicate. Yes, it is truly shocking that the EU has... checks notes... helped fund a museum and library dedicated to the history of one of the most important organisations in Poland's recent history, the formation and actions of which led ultimately to the fall of the communist regime in the country.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Dec 19, 2018 20:32:15 GMT
All this talk of no deal reminds me of Y2K with similar talk of Armageddon. Let's hope the fallout, or lack of, is similar but I fear that I've drifted off in to the realms of fantasy again As I recall, Y2K was prevented from causing major problems due to large numbers of people spending a lot of time working hard on preventing it. Meanwhile, we have three months left until disaster and our MPs are about to take three weeks off.
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Dec 19, 2018 14:59:55 GMT
Just have in or out and leave the rest to parliament.. We leave 99.999999% of governing the country to elected representatives both local and national that is the way a democrat society works. If you are not happy remove that representative.. Problems with that approach are i) MPs are not representative of the views of the population, ii) it's very hard to get a new political party going in the UK (really needs true proportional representation imo). When this divergence occurs, it often ends badly. If only there had been an opportunity to change the voting system. You wouldn't be suggesting that we should consider it again, would you?
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Dec 14, 2018 15:14:03 GMT
I note that Yougov's latest polling (see Peter Kellner's letter in the Times), has: Remain/May's Deal - 62/38 Remain/No Deal - 57/43 Remain/May's Deal/No Deal - 54/18/28 As discussed on BBC1's 'This Week' TV programme last night, how would a second referendum come about? -electoral suicide for Tories to suggest it -Labour want a general election which, if they won, would give them no reason to call a second referendum
Two plausible scenarios:
- May can't get her deal through the HoC and pivots to a referendum to get a mandate for her deal. - It becomes clear Labour can't get a general election
|
|
carolus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 204
Likes: 191
|
Post by carolus on Dec 14, 2018 15:05:39 GMT
I note that Yougov's latest polling (see Peter Kellner's letter in the Times), has:
Remain/May's Deal - 62/38 Remain/No Deal - 57/43 Remain/May's Deal/No Deal - 54/18/28
|
|