For those of you wanting to do some analysis and seat calculations for the Scottish Parliament elections there is now a website that does all this for you - Scotland Votes
Given the absence of reliable (or in fact any) opinion polls to enter in I'm not quite sure how useful it is, but as Peter Snow always says - "It's just a bit of fun"
Monday, 29 January 2007
Geographically Illiterate BBC...
From the BBC Sports Page describing the 5th Round Cup Draw...
"Preston will host neighbours Manchester City,..."
Just how far away can somewhere be whilst still being classed as a neighbour! :roll:
"Preston will host neighbours Manchester City,..."
Just how far away can somewhere be whilst still being classed as a neighbour! :roll:
Thursday, 25 January 2007
Tony Blair Dramatised... 2 different ways
Have had the slightly dubious honour of watching "The Trial of Tony Blair" on Friday evening, and then "The Queen" on Saturday evening.
Note: Spoilers start here...
Whilst "The Trial of Tony Blair" is set in the future (just before the 2010 General Election) and "The Queen" is set in the recent history of 1997, it is fascinating to see the two different portrayals of Blair. In the one he is shown as truly of the people, someone who really had a grasp of the mood of the nation, and who could do no wrong. In the other, he has lost his grip of reality, shown as failing to understand where it all went wrong and how 'his people' no longer seem to need him to lead them.
Both actors have clearly studied their muse, and the familiar gestures and facial inflections are there to help you believe that it is Blair despite the facial features being not particularly familiar. I have issues with 'Trial of Tony Blair' in that the Blair shown appears to lack intelligence and understanding, which, however much I dislike him, I don't think is a fair failing to attribute.
As for 'The Queen' - the only problem with the Blair here is that he is totally and utterly overshadowed by Helen Mirren's Queen Liz. (Well, that and Cherie is made more catty than even I can believe she really is, which unnecessarily enhances your sympathy for Blair)
In conclusion - I much preferred The Queen as a film, and Mirren really should get the Oscar predicted, but for satirical 'if-only's 'The Trial of Tony Blair' was much watch television.
Note: Spoilers start here...
Whilst "The Trial of Tony Blair" is set in the future (just before the 2010 General Election) and "The Queen" is set in the recent history of 1997, it is fascinating to see the two different portrayals of Blair. In the one he is shown as truly of the people, someone who really had a grasp of the mood of the nation, and who could do no wrong. In the other, he has lost his grip of reality, shown as failing to understand where it all went wrong and how 'his people' no longer seem to need him to lead them.
Both actors have clearly studied their muse, and the familiar gestures and facial inflections are there to help you believe that it is Blair despite the facial features being not particularly familiar. I have issues with 'Trial of Tony Blair' in that the Blair shown appears to lack intelligence and understanding, which, however much I dislike him, I don't think is a fair failing to attribute.
As for 'The Queen' - the only problem with the Blair here is that he is totally and utterly overshadowed by Helen Mirren's Queen Liz. (Well, that and Cherie is made more catty than even I can believe she really is, which unnecessarily enhances your sympathy for Blair)
In conclusion - I much preferred The Queen as a film, and Mirren really should get the Oscar predicted, but for satirical 'if-only's 'The Trial of Tony Blair' was much watch television.
Saturday, 20 January 2007
Random Updates on my life...
Running away...
Have just been persuaded to sign up to the Reading half-marathon in March. I've done the Nike 10K in London for the last couple of years, but I reckon a half marathon must be about 20K so I might need to do some exercise and preparation for this one. Oops.
Beer is a better alternative...
Have just found a new blog that I will be adding to the list in future if it keeps up at the same high quality. Stonch (a previously known poster on politicalbetting.com) has set up a beer (real ale) recommendations site here
Have just been persuaded to sign up to the Reading half-marathon in March. I've done the Nike 10K in London for the last couple of years, but I reckon a half marathon must be about 20K so I might need to do some exercise and preparation for this one. Oops.
Beer is a better alternative...
Have just found a new blog that I will be adding to the list in future if it keeps up at the same high quality. Stonch (a previously known poster on politicalbetting.com) has set up a beer (real ale) recommendations site here
Newcastle 1 - 5 Birmingham City (FA Cup 3rd Round Replay)
That was very painful to write... and as I do so, Newcastle are currently 0-2 down at home to West Ham. So what's going on? Well, we have been doing better than we really should have been in recent weeks, particularly with the 3-2 win over Spurs. The problem at home seems to be that it's really difficult for the crowd to get behind the team, and that transmits itself to the really young players on the pitch who are much more sensitive to such ill-feeling from your own supporters.
Update: We managed to claw back to a 2-2 draw with the most offside goal seen this century... and there was I thinking we'd used up all our luck against Spurs last week ;-)
Sigh... maybe I'll have to make a long pilgrimage up to Toon in a couple of weeks time to try and get a better idea of what's actually going on. Anyone fancy joining me?
Update: We managed to claw back to a 2-2 draw with the most offside goal seen this century... and there was I thinking we'd used up all our luck against Spurs last week ;-)
Sigh... maybe I'll have to make a long pilgrimage up to Toon in a couple of weeks time to try and get a better idea of what's actually going on. Anyone fancy joining me?
Wednesday, 10 January 2007
Inheritance Tax - unfair, or not fair enough?
I have, for various reasons, been thinking about inheritance tax recently; what it's for, how it affects people, and what a liberal and christian attitude towards it is. This also lead me into thinking a bit about philanthropy and the attitude we have towards it in this country compared to the attitude prevalent in the US.
Personally, I am of the belief that rather than being too high at 40% (as most people, and all readers of the Daily Mail seem to think); inheritance tax is not high enough, and should be 100% with a noticeably lower threshold. Before you all start throwing things at me in rage and disgust, hear me out as to how I come to this thought;
As a christian, and as a political liberal, I fundamentally believe in the idea of fairness (in some nebulus form) and against the idea of subserviance. This leads to a belief, not in equality of assets as the socialists (communists) would aim towards, but in equality of opportunity. I think that most people would agree with some kind of nebulus idea like this ("yes, of course everyone should have an opportunity to go to University, although clearly it is not right for everybody" etc.), although probably not have developed or refined it particularly.
The problem with inheritance is that in effect, it is random. If you inherit a large amount of money, it is not a reward of your endeavour or skill (unlike a high job income would be), nor of your financial need (unlike state benefits in theory), but is essentially random. (ie you happened to be lucky enough to have wealthy parents).
It goes even further - in some cases, the burden of inheritance is unbearably high. I have met and spoken to people who knew from a very early age (due to incredibly successful parents or grand-parents) that they would never have to work a day in their lives. Obviously there are exceptions, but a fair proportion appear to be totally unable to lead happy, contented lives. The reason seems to be that they have a low self-esteem (due to not having acheived anything for themselves) and are permanantly worried about investments crashing and them losing all the money - they know that were this to happen they would have no idea how to cope and constantly worry about it.
Surely what should be encouraged is a culture of philanthropy. If you have a large estate at your death, then great - why not leave as a legacy, not a large amount to your children for them to bicker and fight about, but to a charitable cause close to your heart. What Bill Gates is trying to do in the United States with his charitable foundation is clearly to be applauded and encouraged and shows some of this theory. In the US they seem to have a better attitude towards this - which contrasts strongly to the overriding thoughts here of - 'but I deserve my parents money - it's my right'.
Personally, I am of the belief that rather than being too high at 40% (as most people, and all readers of the Daily Mail seem to think); inheritance tax is not high enough, and should be 100% with a noticeably lower threshold. Before you all start throwing things at me in rage and disgust, hear me out as to how I come to this thought;
As a christian, and as a political liberal, I fundamentally believe in the idea of fairness (in some nebulus form) and against the idea of subserviance. This leads to a belief, not in equality of assets as the socialists (communists) would aim towards, but in equality of opportunity. I think that most people would agree with some kind of nebulus idea like this ("yes, of course everyone should have an opportunity to go to University, although clearly it is not right for everybody" etc.), although probably not have developed or refined it particularly.
The problem with inheritance is that in effect, it is random. If you inherit a large amount of money, it is not a reward of your endeavour or skill (unlike a high job income would be), nor of your financial need (unlike state benefits in theory), but is essentially random. (ie you happened to be lucky enough to have wealthy parents).
It goes even further - in some cases, the burden of inheritance is unbearably high. I have met and spoken to people who knew from a very early age (due to incredibly successful parents or grand-parents) that they would never have to work a day in their lives. Obviously there are exceptions, but a fair proportion appear to be totally unable to lead happy, contented lives. The reason seems to be that they have a low self-esteem (due to not having acheived anything for themselves) and are permanantly worried about investments crashing and them losing all the money - they know that were this to happen they would have no idea how to cope and constantly worry about it.
Surely what should be encouraged is a culture of philanthropy. If you have a large estate at your death, then great - why not leave as a legacy, not a large amount to your children for them to bicker and fight about, but to a charitable cause close to your heart. What Bill Gates is trying to do in the United States with his charitable foundation is clearly to be applauded and encouraged and shows some of this theory. In the US they seem to have a better attitude towards this - which contrasts strongly to the overriding thoughts here of - 'but I deserve my parents money - it's my right'.
Tuesday, 2 January 2007
A New Year - A New Resolution
Well, here we are at the dawn of a new year (or actually a couple of days in after I spent yesterday doing naught but sleeping and watching bad quality TV). I don't normally make resolutions, but here goes:
I know it's a small aim, and I will almost certainly fail anyway, but it's good to have a goal.
- To update this blog at least once a week, and try to distribute articles evenly amongst potential subjects.
- To not have any 'Err... I haven't written anything, quick lets put something down that's meaningless' posts. [Doesn't that eliminate this post? - Ed]
- To watch less rubbish on TV just because my wife is watching it.
- To read more books - both fiction and 'educational'
I know it's a small aim, and I will almost certainly fail anyway, but it's good to have a goal.
Monday, 1 January 2007
New Year Predictions (Financial)
The Financial Year Ahead (maybe?)
- There will be a (small) credit crunch in an Emerging Market Country at some point in 2007 - and spreads across the board will widen
- Despite good (upwards) housing data the MPC will leave UK Interest rates unchanged for the first 6 months of 2007
- As an economic slow-down affects the USA and then Europe, Stock marktes will trade flat to slightly upwards during the year, but with volatility through the year, and a great difference between sectors. (ie Large-Cap, steady will do well (eg GE, Microsoft) whilst small growthy will do badly)
New Years Predictions (Sporting)
The Sporting Year ahead... (maybe?)
- Newcastle will get to at least the Semi-final of either the UEFA or FA Cup (Hopefully both)
- Chelsea will win the Premiership title on the last day of the season.
- Watford, Charlton and Middlesburgh (surprise drop) will get relegated
- The England Cricket team will do better, and at least be credible at the world Cup (Not really a prediction, they could hardly get worse...)
New Year Predictions... (Political)
Here goes a list of Political Predicitons for the New Year (partly inspired by my entry into the pb.com Political Forecast of 2007
- Gordon Brown will not be Prime Minister on the last day of 2007
- Both the SNP and the Lib Dems will do well at Labours expense in the Scots Parliament elections in May, and will go into coalition government with Alex Salmond as First Minister.
- No charges will be bought in the 'Cash for Honours' scandal.
- David Cameron's Conservatives will gradually lose popularity as people start to tire of his 'all things to all people' approach.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)