shurlock

What's the financial gap when's it at home? The IFS looked solely at changes in income inequality - the elephant in the room, of course, is wealth inequality. Another limit of the report is that it largely ignores housing costs (figure 3.5 is the exception). Income is calculated before housing costs are deducted. The rising cost of rents, and the rising share of renters, has eroded the incomes of poorer households since the crisis, who are disproprtionately renters.

By your logic, the accounts would exaggerate (upwards) our net spend in any one year.

He said in late and injured. From memory none of the players you mention were injured when they arrived. Other things being equal, it's better to get players in early - Uncle Les has said so himself.

Nolan distinguishing himself again

Likewise, agree. Also worth remembering that sides come unstuck not only because they spend too much money but because they fritter it away on the wrong players. But if we're so well-run and recruitment is one of strengths (the typical refrain on here), surely that's an additional argument for spending a bit more at the margins as our investments are more likely to payoff, creating rather than destroying value?

Agree - if we've gone to lengths of keeping everyone together, why not build on that? As you say, it doesn't mean having to go overboard, though as befits simplistic, strawmen threads like this, it invariably invites the accusation of doing a Pompey or spend, spend, spend. Many sides with smaller turnovers than us have been able to selectively strengthen their squads beyond simply reinvesting transfer proceeds or replacing players who have been sold. Last time I checked, they remained financially healthy and sustainable. There are plenty of areas where we could show a bit of disciplined ambition. If we're keeping both Cedric and Bertrand, two Crown Jewels according to Les, why can't we bring in another DM to maximise their effectiveness and let them get further up the pitch? If we know VVD is off next summer for big money and will need to be replaced, why can't we bring in his successor now who can be gently eased into the position while giving us a top quality CB partnership for a season?

Spoken like a true jihadi.

Exquisite strawman by the OP.

Longy Nice burst from Clasie, even if he was knackered afterwards.

So one week on, expecting the police to make arrests anytime now.

34s Those 'Arry lookalikes must do a brisk trade - between Virgin ads, Crimewatch reconstructions and playing crooked coppers and authority-figures in Brit flicks.

When has representing England U-21s become a gold standard? The current side is pretty mediocre and was lucky to get as far as it did in the Euros. Many players who represented England at u-21 level -I dare say the majority- fail to have a career in the Premier League.

I'm just an impartial observer, not some loon getting angry about a random poster on a football chatboard

Even when Glasgow isn't trying, he has you mugs wrapped around his little finger.

See how he bounces back this season - if he continues as he did last season, then I agree it could become a problem. For now, don't think its a priority. A DM, CB, AM are my priority areas in that order.

Only fine? you think we'll be challenging for the top 4 if we don't lose anyone.

Agree with most of this - think its too early to ship out Hoj (though if a team came in with a crazy bid for JWP, I wouldn't dismiss it). But I agree with the intent: we need a bigger, quicker, more dynamic DM and AM.

The9 thinks we'd be challenging for the top 4 if nobody leaves (regardless whether anyone comes in).

It's been discussed ad nauseum on these pages - http://app.ft.com/content/317b4f28-62ef-11e7-8814-0ac7eb84e5f1 Just for you little fella: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4693274/Recession-inevitable-economic-watchdog-warns.html The UK economy is highly vulnerable with plenty of risks to the downside. Many of the problems are structural such as the UK's abysmal productivity record which goes back decades. But they can only be an albatross for the Tories, as the incumbent government, come 2022.

Economy on the up? You really don't do a good job of dispelling those dim right-winger stereotypes, do you?

Why not price or factor in developments that could eat away at Tory support -making a mess of the Brexit negotiations, a deteriorating economy, party disunity and conflict? Each of which poses much greater risks to the Tories than the risks you identify for Labour.

You still stewing over my comments about Laura Kuenssberg? Couldn't give two shakes of a ponytail what the gender of Dr Who is.

The one where May was poised to become the most powerful leader in Europe, rivalling Merkel and consign the Labour Party to the dustbin of history?