Further thought: I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
Yep, let's celebrate 100 years of UK success in Northern Ireland.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
Heh. I know Kwasi. Whatever he is, he's not thick.
He does a good job of pretending then or maybe just a bad liar.
Hilarious. The rudest, most obnoxious and inarticulate poster on PB; an unquestioning fanbois of the repulsive Alex Salmond, accuses a man who has this entry on Wiki of being "thick" :
He read classics and history at Trinity College, Cambridge, achieving a First in both subjects.[9] He was a member of the team which won University Challenge in 1995 (in the first series after the programme was revived by the BBC in 1994).[5][10] He attended Harvard University on a Kennedy Scholarship, and then earned a PhD in economic history from the University of Cambridge in 2000.[11]
🤣🤣🤣
Very smart. I had great hopes for him. Seems to be an unimpressive minister though.
He’s also in the wrong job. There shouldn’t be a hardcore Thatcherite in BEIS.
Very sound on certain issues.
"‘Up to Scottish people’ whether second independence referendum is held, Cabinet minister says"
Further thought: I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
Next thing you'll be telling us that Latinx is amaxing!
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
COVID-19 cases are rising and winter is drawing closer.
1) If you have not been vaccinated, now is the time. 2) If you are offered a booster please take up the offer. 3) Ventilation, masks in crowded indoor spaces and hand washing remain important.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
Except when he does, Dan “never wrong for long” Hodges will be first in the queue to congratulate his fiscal audacity, comparing it unfavourably to Labour’s approach.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
It's not a tax cut, banks will be paying 1% more tax.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
I am sure they have but I don't track mpg or drive a lot of miles so I don't notice that at all. I do notice that a 10 mile journey across London that could have taken 2 hours without live traffic might be just over 1 hour now using random back streets and weird routes, and if it is going to be 2 hours I will nearly always now know that in advance.
So in terms of noticeable improvements, for me at least, live traffic is well ahead of anything else.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
Heh. I know Kwasi. Whatever he is, he's not thick.
He does a good job of pretending then or maybe just a bad liar.
Hilarious. The rudest, most obnoxious and inarticulate poster on PB; an unquestioning fanbois of the repulsive Alex Salmond, accuses a man who has this entry on Wiki of being "thick" :
He read classics and history at Trinity College, Cambridge, achieving a First in both subjects.[9] He was a member of the team which won University Challenge in 1995 (in the first series after the programme was revived by the BBC in 1994).[5][10] He attended Harvard University on a Kennedy Scholarship, and then earned a PhD in economic history from the University of Cambridge in 2000.[11]
🤣🤣🤣
Very smart. I had great hopes for him. Seems to be an unimpressive minister though.
He’s also in the wrong job. There shouldn’t be a hardcore Thatcherite in BEIS.
Very sound on certain issues.
"‘Up to Scottish people’ whether second independence referendum is held, Cabinet minister says"
Do you mean voters in Scotland? That's what counts.
It's lovely though that HYUFD, being neither a Scot nor a voter in Scotland, takes such a passionate interest even if it inevitably ends in 'shut up and go away, it's what the Tory party and its English voters want that matters'.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
It's not a tax cut, banks will be paying 1% more tax.
Indeed, though everyone else will be paying 6% more tax.
The Chancellor needs to stop looking for more taxes everywhere as a solution.
It is poor politics by Sunak though. The adjustment to the surcharge should have been announced as a technical correction at the same time as the corporation tax rise was announced. Poor oversight to overlook that.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
Don’t exaggerate, It’s 51p a litre of Super 98, at today’s exchange rates.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
First 'traitor' of the day. Will it be the last?!
Not only a traitor, but the President of another country is a traitor to the UK too. 🤦♂️
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
It's not a tax cut, banks will be paying 1% more tax.
Yeah, but Labour will argue it should be 7% more tax!
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
…anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
It used to be the vogue to label posts like this as being “un-spoofable”… yours are certainly beyond parody at times…
Further thought: I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
Next thing you'll be telling us that Latinx is amaxing!
I don't know what a Latinx is. But I strongly suspect I wouldn't approve.
Further thought: I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
Next thing you'll be telling us that Latinx is amaxing!
I don't know what a Latinx is. But I strongly suspect I wouldn't approve.
Neither do they, but the US is adopting it anyway.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
The changes in external appearance aren't just driven by aero. Many of the curves and creases on modern skin panels are there to add stiffness as panels have got less thick. Body panels in the 50s were 14 gage, now most OEMs are down to 22 gage in steel or 1000 microns in 6XXX Al.
Plan B of mask wearing and ban on indoor gatherings must be enforced immediately, warns NHS leader NHS Confederation chief said Covid restrictions including a return to working from home need to return or UK at risk of 'winter crisis'
please insert "not" before "value" in my post above.
There may be a case for compulsory facemasks in crowded areas again and mandatory vaccine passports for nightclubs and cinemas and big indoor venues if cases continue to rise, there is no case at all for a complete ban on indoor gatherings
Good to see mask wearing significantly higher on the tube this morning. Over 90% I would guess from about 60% a few weeks ago.
Seems like the public might be ahead of the government. Not for the first time.
I'd say two things to this. One, there is a high preponderance of people suffering from flu-like symptoms that are not covid. They include me, numerous friends and colleagues of mine and quite possibly the Queen.
I have not worn a mask for some time in public but have reverted to doing so on the odd occasion I've left the house while ill. This has nothing to do with a fear of covid but everything to do with not wishing to pass on my ailments to others.
Which leads to the second point. Perhaps the general public are just being responsible, which surely negates the need for a government led dictat.
I'm very much from the liberal (small L) end of the political spectrum so most of this stuff is anathema to me anyway, but I really can't understand people like Jonathan, who clearly believe the government is incompetent (and that's probably kind) yet still see said incompetent government directing every aspect of all of our lives as being desirable.
I just don't get it.
Yes the core of the pandemic necessitated special measures, but we're beyond that and now the focus should be on ensuring that all hands are on deck in the NHS for a tough winter ahead and not on putting us all under the yoke of government.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
Believe it or not, not WHO or anyone else until July last year as up to that point scientific consensus was that heavier than air particles drop to the surface quickly.
Yes, I was one of those getting very angry about this back then, as the evidence was pretty clear going all the way back to the flu pandemic of 1919.
There is going to be a lot more disease circulating when we aren't allowed to open the windows in our passive houses...
That is a good point, which doesn't only apply to houses. In offices/restaurants etc, aircon with HEPA filters would probably make a difference, but good ventilation is something to which not enough attention is being paid.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
First 'traitor' of the day. Will it be the last?!
Not only a traitor, but the President of another country is a traitor to the UK too. 🤦♂️
I was not referring to Higgins, I was referring to any UK citizen who does not accept the creation of NI as a province of the UK
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
Don’t exaggerate, It’s 51p a litre of Super 98, at today’s exchange rates.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
Our very large new Kia Sorento hybrid gets 40mpg lugging all the kids around. Although, I expect it will be the last car we get with an ICE.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
First 'traitor' of the day. Will it be the last?!
Not only a traitor, but the President of another country is a traitor to the UK too. 🤦♂️
I was not referring to Higgins, I was referring to any UK citizen who does not accept the creation of NI as a province of the UK
I would be disappointed if you didn't regard me as a traitor.
From 11 November everyone working in a care home in England will have to be vaccinated. So unless the Government backtracks this market has to settle for yes on 11 November - unless “legally enforceable” excludes the basic sanction of being fired. “Yes” seems to be basically free money and has nothing to do with “Plan B”, lockdowns or anything else.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
The changes in external appearance aren't just driven by aero. Many of the curves and creases on modern skin panels are there to add stiffness as panels have got less thick. Body panels in the 50s were 14 gage, now most OEMs are down to 22 gage in steel or 1000 microns in 6XXX Al.
Bollocks. Most cars today are designed to look like Bladerunner Spinners even the Kia Picanto looks like it wants to be Thunderbird 3.
Quite why Mr or Mrs Smith want to nip down to Aldi to do their weekly shop in an apache gunship goodness only knows.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
Don’t exaggerate, It’s 51p a litre of Super 98, at today’s exchange rates.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
Our very large new Kia Sorento hybrid gets 40mpg lugging all the kids around. Although, I expect it will be the last car we get with an ICE.
I'm still driving my 11 year old Kia Ceed which I've had since new. Its so well built that it drives almost like new eleven years on - though the cruise control doesn't work anymore since flicking the switch to activate it doesn't do anything anymore.
Since it still drives so well I see no purpose in ever buying another ICE, unless this dies before I'm ready to go electric.
The one downside to driving an 11 year old vehicle though is its fuel efficiency is poor compared to getting a new vehicle - I only get about 28mpg. But I figure this is essentially depreciated down to zero already and the savings from not getting a new vehicle financially and environmentally probably make up for that.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
First 'traitor' of the day. Will it be the last?!
Not only a traitor, but the President of another country is a traitor to the UK too. 🤦♂️
I was not referring to Higgins, I was referring to any UK citizen who does not accept the creation of NI as a province of the UK
I would be disappointed if you didn't regard me as a traitor.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
That's interesting. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being too left-wing? (I know left and right are crude labels which miss a lot of nuance - but that's the broad impression I get from your post.) The impression we normally get is that the reverse is true i.e. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being insufficiently left-wing.
Further thought: I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
Next thing you'll be telling us that Latinx is amaxing!
I don't know what a Latinx is. But I strongly suspect I wouldn't approve.
I do know, but it still sounds to me like a porn sub-genre. Although maybe that should be 'Latinxxx' - which you'd no doubt like, Cookie, if only for the consonant threesome
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
That's interesting. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being too left-wing? (I know left and right are crude labels which miss a lot of nuance - but that's the broad impression I get from your post.) The impression we normally get is that the reverse is true i.e. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being insufficiently left-wing.
Depends which part, for Scandinavians and most Germans outside Bavaria we are too rightwing, for the French we are too neoliberal.
However in Eastern Europe and Italy and Switzerland and Austria we are more leftwing and liberal relative to them
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
Don’t exaggerate, It’s 51p a litre of Super 98, at today’s exchange rates.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
Our very large new Kia Sorento hybrid gets 40mpg lugging all the kids around. Although, I expect it will be the last car we get with an ICE.
I'm still driving my 11 year old Kia Ceed which I've had since new. Its so well built that it drives almost like new eleven years on - though the cruise control doesn't work anymore since flicking the switch to activate it doesn't do anything anymore.
Since it still drives so well I see no purpose in ever buying another ICE, unless this dies before I'm ready to go electric.
The one downside to driving an 11 year old vehicle though is its fuel efficiency is poor compared to getting a new vehicle - I only get about 28mpg. But I figure this is essentially depreciated down to zero already and the savings from not getting a new vehicle financially and environmentally probably make up for that.
Our, long-departed, 1998 Skoda Octavia Estate always did 60+ mpg with ease, even when it had done 230,000+ miles and was 18 years old.
Fuel tax was clearly far too low if people were buying crap that does less than 30mpg in 2010.
I'm still driving my 11 year old Kia Ceed which I've had since new. Its so well built that it drives almost like new eleven years on - though the cruise control doesn't work anymore since flicking the switch to activate it doesn't do anything anymore.
Check the fuse and test continuity on the brake pedal switch.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
Cars 'have evolved'; automotive technology, particularly when associated with the internal combustion engine, isn't at the same point as phones, as we understand them now.
The most noticeable improvement for me with cars in 30 years of driving is my satnav with free live traffic.......which happens to be my Iphone!
Cars have got one hell of a lot better over the past few decades, in terms of reliability and efficiency, as well as the noted improvements in in-car technology.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
And you also live in a country where petrol is about 3p a gallon!
Don’t exaggerate, It’s 51p a litre of Super 98, at today’s exchange rates.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
Our very large new Kia Sorento hybrid gets 40mpg lugging all the kids around. Although, I expect it will be the last car we get with an ICE.
I'm still driving my 11 year old Kia Ceed which I've had since new. Its so well built that it drives almost like new eleven years on - though the cruise control doesn't work anymore since flicking the switch to activate it doesn't do anything anymore.
Since it still drives so well I see no purpose in ever buying another ICE, unless this dies before I'm ready to go electric.
The one downside to driving an 11 year old vehicle though is its fuel efficiency is poor compared to getting a new vehicle - I only get about 28mpg. But I figure this is essentially depreciated down to zero already and the savings from not getting a new vehicle financially and environmentally probably make up for that.
Our, long-departed, 1998 Skoda Octavia Estate always did 60+ mpg with ease, even when it had done 230,000+ miles and was 18 years old.
Fuel tax was clearly far too low if people were buying crap that does less than 30mpg in 2010.
As emissions standards increased the fuel economy of your typical diesel dropped 10%+..
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
First iphone $599 for 8 gb of storage and a 3.5 in screen, I've just paid less than that for a phone with 12 gb ram/ 256 storage so he has a point.
He did not say a phone , he specifically said iphones and prices had tumbled. At best you could say he is just stupid and unable to express views better than a 7 year old could.
You could not buy an iPhone 13 back in 2007. Therefore you have to compare the latest iPhone now with the latest iPhone back then. And whilst they are still a 'phone', the modern design has massively more capabilities. You are paying the same for much, much more - you are getting more bang per buck.
In terms of cars, it would be like an 07 VW Passat being able to carry 500 tonnes, go at 2,000 MPH, and be able to park on a nutshell.
Put simply: cars *cannot* evolve as much as phones have: they are limited by other factors, such as maximum speed, physical size, laws etc. Therefore technological improvements will *mostly* go into making them cheaper and more efficient as competitive forces strike.
In the case of battery EV, there are continuous improvements, year by year, in battery capacity & cost.
Each year batteries get a bit better and a bit cheaper. This compound effect has produced some startling reductions in cost.
And will to do so in the near future - because of the time to turn technical improvements into production, the next 5-8 years of battery improvement are already on the way
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
The changes in external appearance aren't just driven by aero. Many of the curves and creases on modern skin panels are there to add stiffness as panels have got less thick. Body panels in the 50s were 14 gage, now most OEMs are down to 22 gage in steel or 1000 microns in 6XXX Al.
That’s just the steel panels - many cars have them in plastic, aluminium, or carbon fibre at the top end. Yet the cars still get heavier!
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
That's interesting. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being too left-wing? (I know left and right are crude labels which miss a lot of nuance - but that's the broad impression I get from your post.) The impression we normally get is that the reverse is true i.e. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being insufficiently left-wing.
Almost all European countries have got contributory welfare systems. The UK is alone in having a completely non-contributory welfare state. They don't understand how it's possible to go from school to unemployment or to have more kids than is possible to afford because their systems aren't compatible with it.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
I'd instead favour not locking down - the consequence of not being vaccinated is that the rest of the country will no longer put life on hold to help you.
But the hospitals are filling up with Covid patients, so routine surgeries are being cancelled. Vaccinated people are suffering because of the unvaccinated.
Whilst that is undoubtedly a part of the response the problem is that the unvaccinated are clogging up our hospitals and preventing us from getting treatment for other things. What do we do about that consequence of their selfishness and stupidity?
If an alcoholic gets cirrhosis of the liver then they'll only get on the transplant list if they give up alcohol. The obese are made to jump through all sorts of hoops if they wish to get bariatric surgery or similar. And so on. Liberty means having the right to make your own choices, it doesn't mean those choices being consequence-free. If the unvaccinated have to face consequences for their choices then that's their own choice.
And others...
All good points. However, what do we want to achieve? Punish the unvaccinated or encourage take-up? The unvaccinated are either hardcore anti-vax or believe themselves to be a low risk. I don't think threatening to withdraw care would have much effect on those who consider themselves invincible - if they're not scared of Covid then it's not going to help. It's a bit like saying to teenagers they won't receive treatment if they take an illegal drug - it's not going to change behaviour because the personal risk is perceived to be (and is) small.
I think carrot and/or stick more useful - either use vaccine passports to make life a right pain for the unvaccinated (but this also inconveniences everyone else) or bribe people to get vaccinated (also apply retrospectively to those vaccinated). Costs would be manageable compared to NHS chaos or another vaccination.
I was never in the "it's no worse than flu" brigade, but I do think it might be instructive to have daily flu updates too, if we keep daily covid updates. Even the current figures are in line with a bad flu season, I would think? Of course, the current figures may get much worse before they get better, but comparison would help give some context.
How many does flu put in intensive care for weeks at a time, though ? That's why the NHS is a bit panicked for this winter.
Yep, good point. I think we'd be crazy to bring back restrictions to avert Covid deaths this winter, but there does come a point where restrictions could make sense to limit NHS load in the short term. However, we do need to have a long term view on that. This winter and that's it, well maybe that's doable- but how do we ensure that? More and better vaccinations? More infections providing natural protection? If what we're looking at is instead this problem every winter then instead we need to build the capacity to deal with it. Dust off the Nightingale facilities and have Covid cases outside of mainstream hospitals. Expensive and hard, but preferable to restrictions every winter.
We are just going to have to gear up hospitals to cope with transmissible diseases again. We haven't had to do that in probably 70 years, other than in the young, the elderly and those who visit developing countries. Yes we may need fever hospitals again.
If we are to have any restrictions introduced it should be vaccine passports for hospitals.
Send the unvaccinated to Nightingales.
Radical idea. I'm instinctively against vaxports because once the door to "your papers please" is open its hard to close again. But, once you are in the NHS system your records are everything. So how we get treated inside hospital is very different to how we get treated going into a restaurant.
There seems to be a pretty simple and brutal truth to deaths vs jabs. If you get jabbed you are unlucky to die. If you don't you are in the lap of the gods. So yes, a separate system to divert the unvaxxed away from the healthy, I can see an argument there.
Not saying I agree with it yet. But I am saying that we need to have a government finding ways to hammer the get vaxxed message, and "no jab = you're on your own" is certainly one way to do that...
No, that's healthcare policy based on moral judgment. It opens the door to "no treatment for lung cancer if you're a smoker", "we'll leave you bleeding by the roadside if you drink and drive", and "no treatment for STIs if you didn't practice safe sex".
Where did I say that they wouldn't get treated? If I understood Philip's proposal it was to have separate hospital facilities for the unvaccinated so that they weren't a risk to the vaccinated. A nightingale hospital is a hospital - there is a duty of care to treat everyone no matter how daft their actions may have been.
It's a very visible moral judgment though, like a debtor's prison. It puts everyone who hasn't been vaccinated together and labels them as enemies of the NHS. I can imagine now the crowds outside jeering and people being admitted. I know from multiple conversations with people who were reluctant to get jabbed that there is spectrum running from those who are worried about side effects or even scared of needles, through people genuinely distrusting of government and regulators, to those who are just mad Laurence Fox style egotists. I managed to convince one of them - a young black man who was highly suspicious of anything initiated by the authorities and surrounded by family and friends who were convincing him this was some kind of eugenics programme, but it took time. I could see he was just mistaken, not wilfully evil.
There would be no public health basis to putting unvaxxed patients in a nightingale and vaxed patients in anormal hospital. The latter still have Covid and would still be infectious. Put all Covid patients in separate hospitals, maybe (though I expect the practicalities of this would be challenging).
While I agree, there is the point that of those hospitalised, the vast majority of those in long term intensive care (which is perhaps the biggest problem for the NHS) are either the unvaccinated or the seriously immunocompromised.
The vaccinated hospitalised don't appear to be hospitalised for very long. It is the unvaccinated who are imposing the greatest (and unnecessary) burden on the NHS.
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
That's interesting. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being too left-wing? (I know left and right are crude labels which miss a lot of nuance - but that's the broad impression I get from your post.) The impression we normally get is that the reverse is true i.e. Europeans are scathing of the UK for being insufficiently left-wing.
Almost all European countries have got contributory welfare systems. The UK is alone in having a completely non-contributory welfare state. They don't understand how it's possible to go from school to unemployment or to have more kids than is possible to afford because their systems aren't compatible with it.
Ireland also has a mainly non contributory welfare system and France, Germany and most of the Nordic countries have non contributory welfare systems as well as contributory. Most European nations also have some form of child benefit.
Plus you can only get the state pension in the UK with sufficient NI credits and the same now applies for JSA even if not for UC
Believe it or not, not WHO or anyone else until July last year as up to that point scientific consensus was that heavier than air particles drop to the surface quickly.
Yes, I was one of those getting very angry about this back then, as the evidence was pretty clear going all the way back to the flu pandemic of 1919.
There is going to be a lot more disease circulating when we aren't allowed to open the windows in our passive houses...
That is a good point, which doesn't only apply to houses. In offices/restaurants etc, aircon with HEPA filters would probably make a difference, but good ventilation is something to which not enough attention is being paid.
Indeed. The idea of using CO2 monitors as a proxy for bad ventilation was a good one.
I do wonder if all these super-eco no leak buildings might turn out to be rather unhealthy in the winter, although at least they shouldn't have cold and damp corners creating fungus spores.
Morning all, on the header bet it depends on the t&cs. I suppose it means "any" restrictions, in which case that must be more likely than not. I don't know about 90% though. If I were betting on this (which I'm not) I'd probably go for the other side, for No.
Regardless, I think people are getting overwrought. There's no harm in proclamations of loving liberty and hating government overreach - me too, I love and hate those respective things - but let's stay grounded in the actual situation we face rather than catastrophizing.
If the combo of flu + covid + backlog looks like overstressing the NHS there'll probably be some restrictions reapplied. Maybe a mask mandate comes back for indoor public spaces, maybe more WFH, maybe (although I really don't think so) having to show proof of vax to access one or two things eg nightclubs. That's about it.
What there's next to zero chance of is another stay-at-home order, schools and unis closing, shops and businesses closing, all of that stuff, of another "lockdown" in its meaningful sense. The politics say no. The health data says no. The economy and public finances say no. It's just not happening.
The only way the calculus changes is if there's a shocking new variant, in which case we have a new emergency and we ctl alt del. But otherwise, no. No lockdown. It's not worth fretting about imo since it's not a serious prospect.
I was with you until you wrote "maybe a mask mandate comes back for indoor public spaces" – that is a very serious infringement on the way we live our lives. Having been to a masked wedding over the summer, and been in continental Europe recently whereby the ludicrous wear a mask to the loo and then take it off to eat fiasco continues, I can tell you that having people masked in public is not something that we should take lightly.
Worth remembering that asking people to wear masks in pubs, bars and schools would have been considered outlandish and oppressive in the extreme just 20 months ago.
Yes, I agree with you. Compulsory masks are an imposition. I more meant *some* indoor spaces rather than generally. I could see that happening but that's about the extent of it. And I personally wouldn't rail too much if it does. Ditto vaxports although I don't expect that and don't really support the idea.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
It's also not necessarily true post-vax (or, at least, certainly not to the same extent).
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
Edit: Yes it is cumulative. And the cumulative excess has roughly halved in the older groups. So roughly half the deaths were forward mortality by a few months not ten years as repeatedly claimed.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
I really don't know why you wish, or need, to bring the EU into this discussion.
My position, having read up on the subject for many years, and spoken with many people at all sorts of levels, is that the border in Ireland is artificial and was created solely to satisfy the demands of a sectarian minority. That minority was encouraged in it's demands by a group of politicians who saw short-term political advantage in doing so. The border was, and remains, contentious, and any sort of commemoration, including a religious service, ecumenical or not, is likely to inflame old hostilities
Value in no imv. If no 10 backed kwarteng over the treasury spat they are not going to hang him out to dry by putting him out to say things which ain't so a week later.
Subject to the unpredictability of the virus, natch.
Kwarteng is a dunderheid of the first order as well as a liar. Heard him on radio this morning , did not know anything on number of cars in UK, said iphones were significantly cheaper than when introduced so electric cars would be the same ( they are 3 x price of first iphones nowadays) and said it would be no problem as there would be chargers on the streets for people who lived in flats. Absolutely thick lying Tory drone.
Heh. I know Kwasi. Whatever he is, he's not thick.
He does a good job of pretending then or maybe just a bad liar.
Hilarious. The rudest, most obnoxious and inarticulate poster on PB; an unquestioning fanbois of the repulsive Alex Salmond, accuses a man who has this entry on Wiki of being "thick" :
He read classics and history at Trinity College, Cambridge, achieving a First in both subjects.[9] He was a member of the team which won University Challenge in 1995 (in the first series after the programme was revived by the BBC in 1994).[5][10] He attended Harvard University on a Kennedy Scholarship, and then earned a PhD in economic history from the University of Cambridge in 2000.[11]
🤣🤣🤣
Very smart. I had great hopes for him. Seems to be an unimpressive minister though.
He’s also in the wrong job. There shouldn’t be a hardcore Thatcherite in BEIS.
He's certainly not a soft-socialist populist like Boris. I don't think he's a hardcore Thatcherite though. But maybe that's just by my standards!
Like many top professional politicians, of course, he is in considerable part opportunist.
I'd instead favour not locking down - the consequence of not being vaccinated is that the rest of the country will no longer put life on hold to help you.
But the hospitals are filling up with Covid patients, so routine surgeries are being cancelled. Vaccinated people are suffering because of the unvaccinated.
Whilst that is undoubtedly a part of the response the problem is that the unvaccinated are clogging up our hospitals and preventing us from getting treatment for other things. What do we do about that consequence of their selfishness and stupidity?
If an alcoholic gets cirrhosis of the liver then they'll only get on the transplant list if they give up alcohol. The obese are made to jump through all sorts of hoops if they wish to get bariatric surgery or similar. And so on. Liberty means having the right to make your own choices, it doesn't mean those choices being consequence-free. If the unvaccinated have to face consequences for their choices then that's their own choice.
And others...
All good points. However, what do we want to achieve? Punish the unvaccinated or encourage take-up? The unvaccinated are either hardcore anti-vax or believe themselves to be a low risk. I don't think threatening to withdraw care would have much effect on those who consider themselves invincible - if they're not scared of Covid then it's not going to help. It's a bit like saying to teenagers they won't receive treatment if they take an illegal drug - it's not going to change behaviour because the personal risk is perceived to be (and is) small.
I think carrot and/or stick more useful - either use vaccine passports to make life a right pain for the unvaccinated (but this also inconveniences everyone else) or bribe people to get vaccinated (also apply retrospectively to those vaccinated). Costs would be manageable compared to NHS chaos or another vaccination.
I was never in the "it's no worse than flu" brigade, but I do think it might be instructive to have daily flu updates too, if we keep daily covid updates. Even the current figures are in line with a bad flu season, I would think? Of course, the current figures may get much worse before they get better, but comparison would help give some context.
How many does flu put in intensive care for weeks at a time, though ? That's why the NHS is a bit panicked for this winter.
Yep, good point. I think we'd be crazy to bring back restrictions to avert Covid deaths this winter, but there does come a point where restrictions could make sense to limit NHS load in the short term. However, we do need to have a long term view on that. This winter and that's it, well maybe that's doable- but how do we ensure that? More and better vaccinations? More infections providing natural protection? If what we're looking at is instead this problem every winter then instead we need to build the capacity to deal with it. Dust off the Nightingale facilities and have Covid cases outside of mainstream hospitals. Expensive and hard, but preferable to restrictions every winter.
We are just going to have to gear up hospitals to cope with transmissible diseases again. We haven't had to do that in probably 70 years, other than in the young, the elderly and those who visit developing countries. Yes we may need fever hospitals again.
If we are to have any restrictions introduced it should be vaccine passports for hospitals.
Send the unvaccinated to Nightingales.
Radical idea. I'm instinctively against vaxports because once the door to "your papers please" is open its hard to close again. But, once you are in the NHS system your records are everything. So how we get treated inside hospital is very different to how we get treated going into a restaurant.
There seems to be a pretty simple and brutal truth to deaths vs jabs. If you get jabbed you are unlucky to die. If you don't you are in the lap of the gods. So yes, a separate system to divert the unvaxxed away from the healthy, I can see an argument there.
Not saying I agree with it yet. But I am saying that we need to have a government finding ways to hammer the get vaxxed message, and "no jab = you're on your own" is certainly one way to do that...
No, that's healthcare policy based on moral judgment. It opens the door to "no treatment for lung cancer if you're a smoker", "we'll leave you bleeding by the roadside if you drink and drive", and "no treatment for STIs if you didn't practice safe sex".
Where did I say that they wouldn't get treated? If I understood Philip's proposal it was to have separate hospital facilities for the unvaccinated so that they weren't a risk to the vaccinated. A nightingale hospital is a hospital - there is a duty of care to treat everyone no matter how daft their actions may have been.
It's a very visible moral judgment though, like a debtor's prison. It puts everyone who hasn't been vaccinated together and labels them as enemies of the NHS. I can imagine now the crowds outside jeering and people being admitted. I know from multiple conversations with people who were reluctant to get jabbed that there is spectrum running from those who are worried about side effects or even scared of needles, through people genuinely distrusting of government and regulators, to those who are just mad Laurence Fox style egotists. I managed to convince one of them - a young black man who was highly suspicious of anything initiated by the authorities and surrounded by family and friends who were convincing him this was some kind of eugenics programme, but it took time. I could see he was just mistaken, not wilfully evil.
There would be no public health basis to putting unvaxxed patients in a nightingale and vaxed patients in anormal hospital. The latter still have Covid and would still be infectious. Put all Covid patients in separate hospitals, maybe (though I expect the practicalities of this would be challenging).
Those people who have chosen to not be vaccinated and are eligible are enemies of the NHS. Their choices impact everyone who needs non-COVID care.
To my mind the biggest difference with the unvaccinated compared to the diabetics, obese, alcoholics, smokers, high risk sports and so forth is the sheer ease with which vaccination can be solved and the fact it has no impact on your life outside of perhaps an hour at the clinic at most. The effort required to solve the problem (very little) and the potential NHS impact are just light years ahead of losing a couple of stone, quitting smoking or drink, being banned from downhill mountain biking or whatever.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
Just to dig into your first sentence: A slightly pedantic point, because I don't think this is exactly what you mean, but there's no real reason why nations should follow 'logical' divisions of geography. Do we regret the 'artificial' division of the Iberian peninsula into two countries? Or applaud the expulsion of Greeks from Anatolia to make a neater division between Greece and Turkey? Of course not. Nationalities tend not to be geographically neat, and our insular experience gives us a slightly misleading impression that this is the case more often than is true. There are clearly two nationalities in Northern Ireland. Now, if those two nationalities were neatly split - all the unionists in Antrim and Down, say - I don't think anyone reasonable would have had any problem with partition. The problem is that the two defied simple geographical division. Indeed, it should be noted that pre-partition there were numerous unionists in what is now the republic - what happened to them? Presumably civil war Ireland was somewhere unionists were highly motivated to leave. Which perhaps illustrates why partition was perhaps considered a least-worst option - the civil war and unionist exodus would have been rather worse had independence been given to the whole island of Ireland. I'm not saying that partition was a good solution. But it's not obvious to me that that any of the other solutions were obviously any better - certainly not at the time. There may have been a window in the nineteenth century when home rule might have been supported by everyone in Ireland (or there might not - my understanding of nineteenth century Irish politics is hazy). But by the early twentieth century, that moment appeared to have passed, if it was there at all.
On NI cultural identities: as a lockdown activity, some friends and I have been listening to albums from before our time and discussing them. We've recently done Van Morrison, a man and his work I previously knew little about, except that he was Northern Irish and (with a name like that) probably Protestant. It turns out that yes, his background is Belfast working class Protestant - in which respect it's fascinating how 'Irish' his music is. Now it's ridiculous to draw too many inferences from a sample of one, but it made me question again how great the gulf actually is between the communities of Northern Ireland.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
It was their only true red line - integrity of the Single Market. Hardly a sneaky or unreasonable demand. As we ourselves acknowledged. We wouldn't have signed up to a sneaky or unreasonable demand, would we? No way. Not our guys.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
It was their only true red line - integrity of the Single Market. Hardly a sneaky or unreasonable demand. As we ourselves acknowledged. We wouldn't have signed up to a sneaky or unreasonable demand, would we? No way. Not our guys.
Is the integrity of the market more important to them than peace in Northern Ireland?
If so, that's their choice they're free to make. They 2should build a border between NI and Eire and enforce it themselves. Good luck to them!
If they're not prepared to do that, they're bluffing and need another solution.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
"British". You should never use that when you mean UK, in the context of NI above all.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
Would be even funnier and more dramatic if @kinabalu was.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
"British". You should never use that when you mean UK, in the context of NI above all.
I have purposefully made an effort to use Britain and British because I support Irish unification, but it's worth noting that the Good Friday Agreement recognises the right of Unionists in Northern Ireland to identify as British, and so they would certainly think of the UK government as a British government.
It's not necessarily exclusive of Northern Ireland.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
Would be even funnier and more dramatic if @kinabalu was.
I always thought it more likely that kinabalu is Tim?
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
Would be even funnier and more dramatic if @kinabalu was.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
HYUFD and Leon could be the same person. They don't use a full stop on the last sentence of each post. It's exactly the sort of quirk one learns to look out for when considering the authorship of an anonymous article. And as for Scottish self-determination, the less said the better on this thread.
But those are, on further scrutiny, outweighed by the differences. So hypothesis disproved.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
Just to dig into your first sentence: A slightly pedantic point, because I don't think this is exactly what you mean, but there's no real reason why nations should follow 'logical' divisions of geography. Do we regret the 'artificial' division of the Iberian peninsula into two countries? Or applaud the expulsion of Greeks from Anatolia to make a neater division between Greece and Turkey? Of course not. Nationalities tend not to be geographically neat, and our insular experience gives us a slightly misleading impression that this is the case more often than is true. There are clearly two nationalities in Northern Ireland. Now, if those two nationalities were neatly split - all the unionists in Antrim and Down, say - I don't think anyone reasonable would have had any problem with partition. The problem is that the two defied simple geographical division. Indeed, it should be noted that pre-partition there were numerous unionists in what is now the republic - what happened to them? Presumably civil war Ireland was somewhere unionists were highly motivated to leave. Which perhaps illustrates why partition was perhaps considered a least-worst option - the civil war and unionist exodus would have been rather worse had independence been given to the whole island of Ireland. I'm not saying that partition was a good solution. But it's not obvious to me that that any of the other solutions were obviously any better - certainly not at the time. There may have been a window in the nineteenth century when home rule might have been supported by everyone in Ireland (or there might not - my understanding of nineteenth century Irish politics is hazy). But by the early twentieth century, that moment appeared to have passed, if it was there at all.
On NI cultural identities: as a lockdown activity, some friends and I have been listening to albums from before our time and discussing them. We've recently done Van Morrison, a man and his work I previously knew little about, except that he was Northern Irish and (with a name like that) probably Protestant. It turns out that yes, his background is Belfast working class Protestant - in which respect it's fascinating how 'Irish' his music is. Now it's ridiculous to draw too many inferences from a sample of one, but it made me question again how great the gulf actually is between the communities of Northern Ireland.
Thanks; thought-provoking post. It's odd about Iberia, isn't it; AIUI, simply falls back to local loyalties as the Moors were driven back toward Andalucia. And reading Forgotten Kingdom and similar reminds one of the fluidity of 'national' borders, particularly in Eastern Europe. Compare and contrast a map of Eastern Europe, especially showing Germany and Poland today with a pre-WWII one. Did everyone move? I have, of course, to concede the point about differences between the populations across the island of Ireland, particularly in the NE, but in the 18th and 19th Centuries that was getting blurred, largely for economic reasons, and some of the significant people in Irish nationalism ate the time were Protestant.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
I really don't know why you wish, or need, to bring the EU into this discussion.
My position, having read up on the subject for many years, and spoken with many people at all sorts of levels, is that the border in Ireland is artificial and was created solely to satisfy the demands of a sectarian minority. That minority was encouraged in it's demands by a group of politicians who saw short-term political advantage in doing so. The border was, and remains, contentious, and any sort of commemoration, including a religious service, ecumenical or not, is likely to inflame old hostilities
If you refuse to respect the right of the Protestant and Unionist majority in Northern Ireland in 1921 to stay part of the UK that is your affair, thankfully the UK government will still respect that
On the subject of treatment for COVID patients my wife and a lot of my European friends are quite scathing about how UK society operates. In their view (and correctly, IMO) the UK has tried to create a society without consequences for poor decisions. Decide not to get the vaccine? Don't worry the NHS will still give you treatment, even at the exclusion of others. Decide to not look after your weight, don't worry the NHS will give you free diabetes drugs and quarterly checkups to tell you to stop being so fat but don't worry about listening to the doctors, we'll give you the drugs for free either way.
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
I don't understand what the objection is to the state providing a basic standard of living for everyone. It is clearly capable of doing so given the material abundance we have, which is a very recent change. It seems extremely cruel and selfish to deny this to people, and doing so would be likely to solve a lot of social problems. The trade off could be provision of a basic standard of healthcare only, so no more endless free treatment on the NHS.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
I really don't know why you wish, or need, to bring the EU into this discussion.
My position, having read up on the subject for many years, and spoken with many people at all sorts of levels, is that the border in Ireland is artificial and was created solely to satisfy the demands of a sectarian minority. That minority was encouraged in it's demands by a group of politicians who saw short-term political advantage in doing so. The border was, and remains, contentious, and any sort of commemoration, including a religious service, ecumenical or not, is likely to inflame old hostilities
If you refuse to respect the right of the Protestant and Unionist majority in Northern Ireland in 1921 to stay part of the UK that is your affair, thankfully the UK government will still respect that
Rather different situation today - 2016 was pre-Brexit.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
Would be even funnier and more dramatic if @kinabalu was.
Maybe we all are? 🤯
I don't think @SeanT has it in him to do @kinabalu's perambulatory style without gnawing his own leg off
All good points. However, what do we want to achieve? ... Dust off the Nightingale facilities and have Covid cases outside of mainstream hospitals. Expensive and hard, but preferable to restrictions every winter.
What I want to achieve is to protect the vaccinated from the anti-social choices of the unvaccinated.
At the moment we are punishing the vaccinated by delaying their medical treatment to accommodate the unvaccinated in hospital. The proposed solution to this is to punish the vaccinated by restricting their lives to delay the infection of the unvaccinated.
We need a better way. Nightingale hospitals for the unvaccinated is one approach. You could think of them as the secondary modern of the healthcare system.
Interesting post that.
"What I want to achieve is to protect the vaccinated from the anti-social choices of the unvaccinated"
I would say that in a liberal democracy there is no requirement for individuals to be social.
Liberal Democracy has been severely tested by the response to Covid rather than Covid itself. This is undeniable.
The article below (pre-pandemic) is interesting because it picks out an already strong and developing threat which is an uncomfortable bedfellow to liberal democracy: populism.
"[Benjamin]Constant presents the “peaceful enjoyment of individual independence” as the modern alternative to direct participation in government. The exclusion of most citizens, most of the time, from direct self-government opens up a large sphere of nonpolitical life—economic, social, cultural, and religious—that citizens expect to conduct on their own terms.”
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
CNN JUST IN: The White House releases its plans to roll out Covid-19 vaccines for children ages 5 to 11, pending FDA authorization
When it's approved by the MHRA, how many months will the JCVI wring it's hands over this one for before chucking it back to the CMOs ?
Hmm, I've been very much pro vaccination for everyone down to 12, but is there really a need to do children under 12 given how mild it is in them?
By the time we actually get round to doing under 12s I imagine the vast majority of them will already have been exposed, with or without their parents' knowledge.
One thing to consider is the bigger picture in terms of deaths. Here are the weekly COVID deaths in England and Wales and the non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average (2015-2019):
Week ending: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths in excess of the five-year average
Personally I think this puts the COVID deaths in context of more deaths happening anyway. I think there's a lot of low-hanging fruit that dodged the reaper during last winter when flu was limited by the restrictions. How many of those dying from COVID may have been picked off anyway is unknown, but I don't think the COVID deaths warrant any extra action.
No, it is now known and the strong majority of deaths were not what is called "forward displacement of mortality", especially not in the under-65s:
So it turns out excess deaths are not "people whose time was up anyway"?
Can we still blame the dead for being "fat and stupid" though? I think it's important we find some way of dehumanising them, because it's easier than wearing a mask on the tube or something.
What excess deaths?
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
If we do invent a time machine, we should go back and save all those thin, young, and clever people who were unfortunate enough to die. Not the others, though, obviously.
Why do you keep throwing Leon's words at me? Are you incapable of telling us apart? I'll give you a tip, to the left of the comment is the posters name. If it says Leon then that is him. If it doesn't, and it has my name, it is me.
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
Sometimes different posters are the same person... Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
Would be even funnier and more dramatic if @kinabalu was.
I always thought it more likely that kinabalu is Tim?
Although kinabalu as MrEd would be amusing.
It was suggested – at least once – that Sean and Tim were one and the same.
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
It was the EU who insisted on a border in the Irish Sea for any GB trade deal.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
That is a remarkable non sequitur, even by your standards. No-one, to date, has mentioned the EU in this connection, although of course the present confusion is down to the existence of the artificial border.
Plenty have mentioned the EU, it was the EU who demanded the Irish Sea border for a trade deal not the UK government
No, it was the British Government who insisted on the border, as a result of leaving the EU and the Single Market. But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
No, the British government just wanted to leave the EU and the single market.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
I really don't know why you wish, or need, to bring the EU into this discussion.
My position, having read up on the subject for many years, and spoken with many people at all sorts of levels, is that the border in Ireland is artificial and was created solely to satisfy the demands of a sectarian minority. That minority was encouraged in it's demands by a group of politicians who saw short-term political advantage in doing so. The border was, and remains, contentious, and any sort of commemoration, including a religious service, ecumenical or not, is likely to inflame old hostilities
If you refuse to respect the right of the Protestant and Unionist majority in Northern Ireland in 1921 to stay part of the UK that is your affair, thankfully the UK government will still respect that
Rather different situation today - 2016 was pre-Brexit.
So what Unionist parties still win more votes than Nationalist parties in NI even after Brexit
I see there's to be an interdenominational service to mark a century of Partition in N. Ireland. HM Queen and Johnson will be present, but not the Irish President. Can't help feeling this isn't a good idea.
It is a good idea. If Michael D Higgins wants to refuse his invitation to commemorate the 100 year centenary of NI (which also of course created the Irish Free State which became the Irish Republic he is now president of) to make a political point and have a sulk that is up to him
As I said, I'm not at all sure. What we now know as N.Ireland was created as a response to a 'quasi' revolution fostered by a small religious minority and encouraged by divisive politicians in England, and as a consequence of different economic treatment of said religious minority.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Well I am sure. If President Higgins wants to throw a tantrum tough, he was sent an invitiation, if he refused it why should we care?
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
Well, I for one regard the artificial division of the island of Ireland as a something to be regretted. And I regard the policy of the Conservative party 120 or so years ago as devious and, in some aspects at least (the Curragh Mutiny) as at least bordering on treasonable.
Just to dig into your first sentence: A slightly pedantic point, because I don't think this is exactly what you mean, but there's no real reason why nations should follow 'logical' divisions of geography. Do we regret the 'artificial' division of the Iberian peninsula into two countries? Or applaud the expulsion of Greeks from Anatolia to make a neater division between Greece and Turkey? Of course not. Nationalities tend not to be geographically neat, and our insular experience gives us a slightly misleading impression that this is the case more often than is true. There are clearly two nationalities in Northern Ireland. Now, if those two nationalities were neatly split - all the unionists in Antrim and Down, say - I don't think anyone reasonable would have had any problem with partition. The problem is that the two defied simple geographical division. Indeed, it should be noted that pre-partition there were numerous unionists in what is now the republic - what happened to them? Presumably civil war Ireland was somewhere unionists were highly motivated to leave. Which perhaps illustrates why partition was perhaps considered a least-worst option - the civil war and unionist exodus would have been rather worse had independence been given to the whole island of Ireland. I'm not saying that partition was a good solution. But it's not obvious to me that that any of the other solutions were obviously any better - certainly not at the time. There may have been a window in the nineteenth century when home rule might have been supported by everyone in Ireland (or there might not - my understanding of nineteenth century Irish politics is hazy). But by the early twentieth century, that moment appeared to have passed, if it was there at all.
On NI cultural identities: as a lockdown activity, some friends and I have been listening to albums from before our time and discussing them. We've recently done Van Morrison, a man and his work I previously knew little about, except that he was Northern Irish and (with a name like that) probably Protestant. It turns out that yes, his background is Belfast working class Protestant - in which respect it's fascinating how 'Irish' his music is. Now it's ridiculous to draw too many inferences from a sample of one, but it made me question again how great the gulf actually is between the communities of Northern Ireland.
Thanks; thought-provoking post. It's odd about Iberia, isn't it; AIUI, simply falls back to local loyalties as the Moors were driven back toward Andalucia. And reading Forgotten Kingdom and similar reminds one of the fluidity of 'national' borders, particularly in Eastern Europe. Compare and contrast a map of Eastern Europe, especially showing Germany and Poland today with a pre-WWII one. Did everyone move? I have, of course, to concede the point about differences between the populations across the island of Ireland, particularly in the NE, but in the 18th and 19th Centuries that was getting blurred, largely for economic reasons, and some of the significant people in Irish nationalism ate the time were Protestant.
'Did everyone move' - yes, pretty much. The mass movement of Germans back to rump Germany at the end of WW2 is interesting but little commented-on. Was it voluntary or forced? There was certainly an understandable mass-fleeing of Germans westwards as the red army advanced. Most of those who didn't flee were moved westwards at the end of the war - presumably forcibly, though the extent to which staying as a foreigner in what was now Russian-occupied Poland was an attractive option was probably minimal anyway.
The process by which a body of people comes to identify as a nation in an interesting and slightly mysterious process. Catalans never came to identify as Spaniards even 500 years after the union by marriage between Castille and Aragon. But there is no question about English identity despite the different statelets it formed from just over 1000 years ago. Yet Germans and Italians have managed to form a coherent nation despite their respective states being only a couple of hundred years old. My theory is that to form a nation what is really needed is either an oppressor or a campaign against a foreign force.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 39m If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
Except when he does, Dan “never wrong for long” Hodges will be first in the queue to congratulate his fiscal audacity, comparing it unfavourably to Labour’s approach.
Hodges, for me, suffers particularly badly from "always be saying something" syndrome. AB3S afflicts all pundits to a degree. Eg me, when I'm having a full monty day on here, people will have noticed that a certain percentage of my output will be utter codswallop. Ok, I like to think that percentage is low single digits, but the point is there is codswallop in the mix and the more I post the more cod there will be. It's just physics this. If my codswallop quotient is 15% and I do 20 posts on a thread there'll be 3 stinkers. 3 that shouldn't have seen the light of day. Dan Hodges, it seems to me, has a quotient of greater than 50%, meaning most of his output is tosh. It's more tosh than not. And given his output, which is vast since he must always be saying something, that is an awful lot of tosh. Still, he gets paid, I suppose. You have to pay the rent.
LOL at @david_herdson's reply: It's the only tone he has.
Mogadon Man, as Private Eye called Geoffrey Howe.
So Labour need a new Tone?
I'm not convinced that armed rebellion in favour of an Irish state would be electorally beneficial for them. But after Corbyn*, nothing would surprise me.
*delightfully, autocorrect still refuses to recognise him, and insists on rendering him 'Cornyn'.
Comments
I'm still undecided on how I feel about the word 'vaxxed'. I would expect to be instinctively hostile to such a neologism, particularly one with an unfamiliar double consonant in the middle. But I'm not. And I'm quite enjoying the double x. I get the same sort of enjoyment from it as I do from the triple s in the word 'Invernessshire'. (Which I know is usually hyphenated - but where is the fun in that? (The German language includes at least one word with a triple consonant - a compound word, naturally: balletttanzer - ballet dancer - it used to only have two ts, but a third was added in the 90s 'to make things simpler'. Which I think was the most Teutonic thing which happened that decade.))
All who disagree want planetary death.
My 15 year old car does about 25mpg if I don’t drive like Lewis Hamilton. The latest version of the same car does about 45mpg (but costs a fortune in depreciation, so I stick with the old one).
Do you mean voters in Scotland? That's what counts.
@DPJHodges
·
39m
If Rishi Sunak really is planning on announcing a cut in taxes for the banks, whilst simultaneously announcing a rise in taxes for everyone else, then I don't see how Labour can fail to take him to the cleaners. That's the sort of blunder that defines a politician.
1) If you have not been vaccinated, now is the time.
2) If you are offered a booster please take up the offer.
3) Ventilation, masks in crowded indoor spaces and hand washing remain important.
https://twitter.com/CMO_England/status/1450759752150093838?s=20
So in terms of noticeable improvements, for me at least, live traffic is well ahead of anything else.
It's been a cause of at least simmering hostility ever since.
Northern Ireland was created to respect the wishes of the majority Protestant and Unionist population of the province who wanted to stay part of the UK and anyone who disrespects that is a traitor to the UK as far as I am concerned
The Chancellor needs to stop looking for more taxes everywhere as a solution.
It is poor politics by Sunak though. The adjustment to the surcharge should have been announced as a technical correction at the same time as the corporation tax rise was announced. Poor oversight to overlook that.
The car 15 years older than mine, probably did about 12mpg on a good day. All this, despite cars getting heavier over time due to safety regulations.
As @Philip_Thompson also notes, cars today all look the same, mostly because the manufacturers develop them in wind tunnels.
Will it be the last?!
It extends to other areas too, had too many kids and can't afford it on your low wages? Don't worry we've got tax credits for that, need a bigger property for all those kids you can't afford? Great we'll give you housing benefit for that bit too. Oh you don't like your job? Don't worry about it guys, just quit and we'll give you unemployment benefits plus a myriad of top ups to ensure the kids you could already couldn't afford aren't neglected and we'll top up your housing benefits too so the landlord doesn't evict you. Wait, you never want to work again? It's ok, there's no time limit to benefits! You can sit there and do nothing all day if you want and we don't mind.
You get the picture. People make stupid decisions and the state has decided its role is to protect people from their own stupid choices.
https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1450767545179508740?s=20
I have not worn a mask for some time in public but have reverted to doing so on the odd occasion I've left the house while ill. This has nothing to do with a fear of covid but everything to do with not wishing to pass on my ailments to others.
Which leads to the second point. Perhaps the general public are just being responsible, which surely negates the need for a government led dictat.
I'm very much from the liberal (small L) end of the political spectrum so most of this stuff is anathema to me anyway, but I really can't understand people like Jonathan, who clearly believe the government is incompetent (and that's probably kind) yet still see said incompetent government directing every aspect of all of our lives as being desirable.
I just don't get it.
Yes the core of the pandemic necessitated special measures, but we're beyond that and now the focus should be on ensuring that all hands are on deck in the NHS for a tough winter ahead and not on putting us all under the yoke of government.
Lord Frost has however managed to get the EU to back down a little on that in the last week and promise minimal checks.
Boris will also impose direct rule on NI however if the EU do not go further and remove it completely as if they do not then Unionist parties will withdraw from the Stormont executive
In offices/restaurants etc, aircon with HEPA filters would probably make a difference, but good ventilation is something to which not enough attention is being paid.
“Clarification (12 October 2021): If vaccines become mandatory for people working in care homes at any point in 2021 (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vaccination-of-people-working-or-deployed-in-care-homes-operational-guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-of-people-working-or-deployed-in-care-homes-operational-guidance) this market will be settled for yes, so long as the measure satisfies the other conditions in the market rules, i.e. that it is mandatory, implemented by the UK government, England-wide and legally enforceable.”
From 11 November everyone working in a care home in England will have to be vaccinated. So unless the Government backtracks this market has to settle for yes on 11 November - unless “legally enforceable” excludes the basic sanction of being fired. “Yes” seems to be basically free money and has nothing to do with “Plan B”, lockdowns or anything else.
Quite why Mr or Mrs Smith want to nip down to Aldi to do their weekly shop in an apache gunship goodness only knows.
Since it still drives so well I see no purpose in ever buying another ICE, unless this dies before I'm ready to go electric.
The one downside to driving an 11 year old vehicle though is its fuel efficiency is poor compared to getting a new vehicle - I only get about 28mpg. But I figure this is essentially depreciated down to zero already and the savings from not getting a new vehicle financially and environmentally probably make up for that.
The Health Secretary will insist there's no need yet for new Covid restrictions when he gives a No 10 press conference.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16478612/sajid-javid-press-conference-covid-booster-jabs/
Interesting, Guernsey has just announced a media briefing tomorrow.....
However in Eastern Europe and Italy and Switzerland and Austria we are more leftwing and liberal relative to them
Fuel tax was clearly far too low if people were buying crap that does less than 30mpg in 2010.
But, as before, when this particular discussion started, it was concerned the wisdom or otherwise of an ecumenical service to commemorate the centenary of the existence of N. Ireland. Nothing whatsoever to do with the EU.
One of the successes of the energy version of DARPA:
https://arpa-e.energy.gov/news-and-media/blog-posts/arpa-e-investor-update-vol-5
My figures are for post-vax.
It was quite ready to use a technological solution to avoid a hard trade border in Ireland (and the GFA only required no military checkpoints at the Irish border which was never on the cards anyway). However the EU refused to consider that and demanded a border in the Irish Sea before it would agree to a free trade agreement with GB.
Northern Ireland's position as a UK province should be respected and commemorated and by doing so we can tell the EU we are ready to stand up for it and continue to press to remove the Irish Sea border via Lord Frost
The vaccinated hospitalised don't appear to be hospitalised for very long. It is the unvaccinated who are imposing the greatest (and unnecessary) burden on the NHS.
Plus you can only get the state pension in the UK with sufficient NI credits and the same now applies for JSA even if not for UC
I do wonder if all these super-eco no leak buildings might turn out to be rather unhealthy in the winter, although at least they shouldn't have cold and damp corners creating fungus spores.
Unless I'm very much mistaken those excess death charts are cumulative. Nobody sane doubts that there were excess deaths pre vaccines.
But the excess death rise in that chart stopped months ago. They've flatlined for the under 65s (and 10% of a small number remains a small number) and are trending down not up now for older groups.
We don't have a time machine and can't revive those who died pre vaccines. But post vaccination things have changed.
Edit: Yes it is cumulative. And the cumulative excess has roughly halved in the older groups. So roughly half the deaths were forward mortality by a few months not ten years as repeatedly claimed.
My position, having read up on the subject for many years, and spoken with many people at all sorts of levels, is that the border in Ireland is artificial and was created solely to satisfy the demands of a sectarian minority. That minority was encouraged in it's demands by a group of politicians who saw short-term political advantage in doing so.
The border was, and remains, contentious, and any sort of commemoration, including a religious service, ecumenical or not, is likely to inflame old hostilities
Like many top professional politicians, of course, he is in considerable part opportunist.
The effort required to solve the problem (very little) and the potential NHS impact are just light years ahead of losing a couple of stone, quitting smoking or drink, being banned from downhill mountain biking or whatever.
PM "I know my honourable friend takes an active interest..."
A slightly pedantic point, because I don't think this is exactly what you mean, but there's no real reason why nations should follow 'logical' divisions of geography. Do we regret the 'artificial' division of the Iberian peninsula into two countries? Or applaud the expulsion of Greeks from Anatolia to make a neater division between Greece and Turkey? Of course not. Nationalities tend not to be geographically neat, and our insular experience gives us a slightly misleading impression that this is the case more often than is true.
There are clearly two nationalities in Northern Ireland. Now, if those two nationalities were neatly split - all the unionists in Antrim and Down, say - I don't think anyone reasonable would have had any problem with partition. The problem is that the two defied simple geographical division. Indeed, it should be noted that pre-partition there were numerous unionists in what is now the republic - what happened to them? Presumably civil war Ireland was somewhere unionists were highly motivated to leave. Which perhaps illustrates why partition was perhaps considered a least-worst option - the civil war and unionist exodus would have been rather worse had independence been given to the whole island of Ireland.
I'm not saying that partition was a good solution. But it's not obvious to me that that any of the other solutions were obviously any better - certainly not at the time.
There may have been a window in the nineteenth century when home rule might have been supported by everyone in Ireland (or there might not - my understanding of nineteenth century Irish politics is hazy). But by the early twentieth century, that moment appeared to have passed, if it was there at all.
On NI cultural identities: as a lockdown activity, some friends and I have been listening to albums from before our time and discussing them. We've recently done Van Morrison, a man and his work I previously knew little about, except that he was Northern Irish and (with a name like that) probably Protestant. It turns out that yes, his background is Belfast working class Protestant - in which respect it's fascinating how 'Irish' his music is. Now it's ridiculous to draw too many inferences from a sample of one, but it made me question again how great the gulf actually is between the communities of Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/JGForsyth/status/1450782492282265604?s=20
We didn't have a vaccine rolled out in the past. We do now. Lockdown measures were dubious but probably worthwhile pre-vaccinations. Post-vaccinations they're absolutely not.
If you can't wrap your head around the fact that different posters are different people ... Or that pre and post vaccines we might require different policies and priorities ... Then that is a limitation of your intelligence not mine.
If so, that's their choice they're free to make. They 2should build a border between NI and Eire and enforce it themselves. Good luck to them!
If they're not prepared to do that, they're bluffing and need another solution.
Although if it turned out that you were part of the Leon multiverse I think it would rate as one of the more surprising PB season finales.
It's not necessarily exclusive of Northern Ireland.
Mogadon Man, as Private Eye called Geoffrey Howe.
Although kinabalu as MrEd would be amusing.
But those are, on further scrutiny, outweighed by the differences. So hypothesis disproved.
I have, of course, to concede the point about differences between the populations across the island of Ireland, particularly in the NE, but in the 18th and 19th Centuries that was getting blurred, largely for economic reasons, and some of the significant people in Irish nationalism ate the time were Protestant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57796429
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centenary_of_the_Easter_Rising.
If you refuse to respect the right of the Protestant and Unionist majority in Northern Ireland in 1921 to stay part of the UK that is your affair, thankfully the UK government will still respect that
Interesting post that.
"What I want to achieve is to protect the vaccinated from the anti-social choices of the unvaccinated"
I would say that in a liberal democracy there is no requirement for individuals to be social.
Liberal Democracy has been severely tested by the response to Covid rather than Covid itself. This is undeniable.
The article below (pre-pandemic) is interesting because it picks out an already strong and developing threat which is an uncomfortable bedfellow to liberal democracy: populism.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-populist-challenge-to-liberal-democracy/
"[Benjamin]Constant presents the “peaceful enjoyment of individual independence” as the modern alternative to direct participation in government. The exclusion of most citizens, most of the time, from direct self-government opens up a large sphere of nonpolitical life—economic, social, cultural, and religious—that citizens expect to conduct on their own terms.”
Linked to this issue, see below from Sumption:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/15/liberal-democracy-will-biggest-casualty-pandemic/
CNN
JUST IN: The White House releases its plans to roll out Covid-19 vaccines for children ages 5 to 11, pending FDA authorization
When it's approved by the MHRA, how many months will the JCVI wring it's hands over this one for before chucking it back to the CMOs ?
Did the JCVI second-guess the MHRA before Covid?
By the time we actually get round to doing under 12s I imagine the vast majority of them will already have been exposed, with or without their parents' knowledge.
The process by which a body of people comes to identify as a nation in an interesting and slightly mysterious process. Catalans never came to identify as Spaniards even 500 years after the union by marriage between Castille and Aragon. But there is no question about English identity despite the different statelets it formed from just over 1000 years ago. Yet Germans and Italians have managed to form a coherent nation despite their respective states being only a couple of hundred years old.
My theory is that to form a nation what is really needed is either an oppressor or a campaign against a foreign force.
But after Corbyn*, nothing would surprise me.
*delightfully, autocorrect still refuses to recognise him, and insists on rendering him 'Cornyn'.
FFS!!! No!