Brexit: Now What? Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
ddt said:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting the word "odds" - it's not a way of expressing probabilities I'm used to - but I thought that odds 4-1 means there's a 1 in 5 probability of the thing occurring. That then gives probabilities:
JRM: 20%
Corbyn: 14.3%
Johnson: 11.1%
Rudd/Leadsom/Gove: each 8.3%
which add up to only 70.4%. Then "something else" is considered more likely than any of those most likely choices. :eye-poppi
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have made it clear those were 'European' odds as opposed to British-style odds. They indicate your return on the bet - including your original stake - rather than your profit. 4-1 European = 3-1 Brit.
 
Last edited:
The odds simply reflect how people are betting, by and large.

Victorian Dad is currently top because he leads the latest Tory poll of members...but he has 20%. It's what the parliamentary party thinks that's key, and I can't see them wanting to put him forward to the membership. Or Johnson. Or Gove.
 
GlennB said:
Sorry, I should have made it clear those were 'European' odds as opposed to British-style odds.
Click to expand...
You filthy Bremoaner! Traitor! Vaterlandslose Geselle!
;)

GlennB said:
They indicate your return on the bet - including your original stake - rather than your profit. 4-1 European = 3-1 Brit.
Click to expand...
Thank you for clarifying. I think you have made slight miscalculation, then, though.

GlennB said:
The current odds on "PM to succeed May" seem a little counter-intuitive:
JRM 4-1
Corbyn 6-1
Johnson 8-1
Rudd/Leadsom/Gove, each 11-1

All that comes to 86% of the odds, so "Something not described above" is roughly as likely as BoJo to follow May as PM :D Madness reigns.
Click to expand...
That makes the underlying probabilities:
JRM: 25%
Corbyn: 16.7%
Johnson: 12.5%
Ruddd/Leadsom/Gove: each 9.1%

Added up, that's 81.4%, so the remainder (someone else/no-one at all) is more likely than Corbyn and less than JRM.
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
I don't think so. I strongly suspect it will be more "Oh ****, what have we done?"
Click to expand...

Or it will be because of our mysterious power over world economic forces by "talking the country down".

Hmm, maybe we could cash in on that. "Nice little economy you get here, <head of state>. Shame if anything were to happen to it, like people talking the economy down."
 
Tolls said:
The odds simply reflect how people are betting, by and large.

Victorian Dad is currently top because he leads the latest Tory poll of members...but he has 20%. It's what the parliamentary party thinks that's key, and I can't see them wanting to put him forward to the membership. Or Johnson. Or Gove.
Click to expand...

But when it comes to Tory leadership elections, the parliamentary party selects two candidates, and those then are put to vote to the membership-at-large. So, for Rees-Mogg to succeed (today), he'd only need to come out second with the PP. So there need to be two candidates they think are non-toxic who both get enough votes - and not (many) more of those because then the votes may get spread too thin. The MPs don't get a vote "no Rees-Mogg, only over my dead body", they only can vote in favour of a candidate. It's still a gamble.
 
ddt said:
You filthy Bremoaner! Traitor! Vaterlandslose Geselle!
;)


Thank you for clarifying. I think you have made slight miscalculation, then, though.


That makes the underlying probabilities:
JRM: 25%
Corbyn: 16.7%
Johnson: 12.5%
Ruddd/Leadsom/Gove: each 9.1%

Added up, that's 81.4%, so the remainder (someone else/no-one at all) is more likely than Corbyn and less than JRM.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was rounding heavily. In my head.

"Fatherlandless journeyman". Cheers :)
 
Last edited:
Even then.
Remember, the membership voted for Cameron over Davis.

Then again, they also voted for IDS...so who knows?
:)
 
More Brexit "good news" :(

The UK economy expanded by less than previously thought in the last three months of 2017, official figures say.

GDP grew by 0.4% in the October-to-December period, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said, down from the initial estimate of 0.5%.

The revision was due to slower growth in production industries, the ONS said.

In 2017 as a whole, the economy grew by 1.7%, also slightly lower than previously thought and the weakest since 2012.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43154467

Looks like those economists that predicted lower growth as a result of the uncertainty over Brexit weren't so wrong.
 
ddt said:
What? It's a well-known fact that the EU has never disclosed its membership. It's only very recently that the May administration found out that Ireland is a member and that she's faced with a border problem.
Click to expand...
Until then did she not know about the Border, because the Republic never disclosed to her that it was part of the EU, and no longer in the U.K.? That would explain many things.
 
Well the cabinet are meeting today to decide what type of Brexit they want (good job they haven't called Article 50 yet). So we can expect a weekend of briefings saying contradictory things as to the outcome of the meeting, Johnson threatening to resign but not putting us out of our misery and doing it, before May gives a speech next week that will not enlighten anyone any further as to what the UK Government actually wants beyond the usual wishes for faeries and unicorns that is.
 
Mid said:
Well the cabinet are meeting today to decide what type of Brexit they want (good job they haven't called Article 50 yet). So we can expect a weekend of briefings saying contradictory things as to the outcome of the meeting, Johnson threatening to resign but not putting us out of our misery and doing it, before May gives a speech next week that will not enlighten anyone any further as to what the UK Government actually wants beyond the usual wishes for faeries and unicorns that is.
Click to expand...

:D

I'd be absolutely staggered if anything even resembling a unified approach comes out of the Chequers meeting.

p.s. I hope that 'faeries' aren't some kind of Irish fairy, coming over here with their foreign ways and funny food and taking our fairy jobs .
 
GlennB said:
:D

I'd be absolutely staggered if anything even resembling a unified approach comes out of the Chequers meeting.
Click to expand...


Well, anything definite risks a rapid dethroning of She who won't **** off for the good of the country.
 
GlennB said:
...snip...

p.s. I hope that 'faeries' aren't some kind of Irish fairy, coming over here with their foreign ways and funny food and taking our fairy jobs .
Click to expand...

I know coming over here doing the work our fantasy folk won't do, it's a disgrace! And don't get me started on the leprechauns
 
Soubry is, once again, going against the manifesto she stood on in last year's election. Her own constituents also voted Leave. She will, hopefully, lose her seat at the next election. In the meantime she seems quite happy to accept Soros money and do her best to ensure a Corbyn-led government and the defeat of her own party.
 
ceptimus said:
Soubry is, once again, going against the manifesto she stood on in last year's election. Her own constituents also voted Leave. She will, hopefully, lose her seat at the next election. In the meantime she seems quite happy to accept Soros money and do her best to ensure a Corbyn-led government and the defeat of her own party.
Click to expand...

Exactly people voted for a dealless exit and a hard border in Ireland and a resumption of the troubles and that is what they will get no matter what.

It was clear on the ballot I am sure. Invoke article 50, never state clear goals or objectives we even want, run out the clock, leave the EU with no deal and hard borders with all EU countries like Ireland. Anything less than that is clear treason.
 
Once again the big lie of "no clear objectives" is trotted out. The objectives of leaving the EU INCLUDING the CU and SM, were laid out at the last election. Beyond that their objective of maintaining the closest possible relationship with the EU - as near as possible to what we have now - has been repeatedly stated by ALL UK politicians on all wings of all parties. If there is any lack of clarity it comes from the EU side - it is a question of what they will allow, rather than what the UK wants.
 
ceptimus said:
Once again the big lie of "no clear objectives" is trotted out. The objectives of leaving the EU INCLUDING the CU and SM, were laid out at the last election. Beyond that their objective of maintaining the closest possible relationship with the EU - as near as possible to what we have now - has been repeatedly stated by ALL UK politicians on all wings of all parties. If there is any lack of clarity it comes from the EU side - it is a question of what they will allow, rather than what the UK wants.
Click to expand...


Of course it is. Who would have expected anything else?

The U.K. is leaving the E.U. of its own accord. They weren't kicked out.

What other standard do you thing a sovereign entity like the E.U. should use? It is exactly the one the U.K. wants to use by leaving.

But you seem to be a bit twisted around on this "lack of clarity" issue. It isn't the E.U. who have been unclear about their requirements and objectives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom