You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Would you keep the breastydumplings in this fantasy one of yours?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
If he was wrong nearly every time then you could have cleaned up by betting on the other horse.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
one way to lose money long term on betfair was to bet on the 1.01 "winner" as the winner comes home.
The bets have a habit of losing more than 1% of the time.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
Morgoth wasn’t in LoTR, only the backstory.
He gets mentioned at the Council - and that Sauron is just a flunky.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Never bet on the result you want to happen. If you win it is consolation, and if you lose you don’t care as much.
There is also the point that you are more likely to spot value that way.
Yep - always bet on a 0-0 draw in football - at least then there is a consolation if the match is boring.
Bet on no goal scorer in the first goal scorer market. The odds are the same and you get own goals as they don't count.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
The Alex Bird method.
ETA:- He had many different ways of beating the bookmaker, but probably his most famous was his success on betting on the result of photo finishes. Unlike today photo finishes would take about 5 minutes to develop so there was always an active betting market on the outcome. Bird very early on noticed that when horses crossed the line together an optical illusion meant that the horse on the far side invariably looked like he had won.
He also discovered a simple technique which meant the illusion didn't occur. He stood at an elevated vantage point as near to the winning post as possible, he would keep very still, close his left eye and create an imaginary line across the track at the finishing line. He used this simple system for the next 20 years to make himself a fortune. With a reported 500 consecutive successful bets. http://www.bookmakers1.com/alexbird.html
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
Morgoth wasn’t in LoTR, only the backstory.
I say it counts as backstory is story. So you can have Morgoths big spider friend as well.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
that there are lots of posh seats where people vote LD is just the right numbers to both feel good and make sure there is a Tory government that won't bash the rich.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
The Alex Bird method.
It was pouring down, we were all waiting to go, and he was arguing with someone through a window that their photo had got it wrong.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
I do wonder at what point regulation starts to impact on headquarters, but also even market participation.
What will the impact of fines well over 10 billion Euro on Google in a very few years from the EuCo be? Not enough yet to be substantial, but they are building up.
Interesting that Shell are not the first big Dutch company to do this in recent years. According to Sky this follows RELX (formally Reed and Elsevier) in 2017 and Unilever in 2018. Good for the UK tax revenue if nothing else.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Would you keep the breastydumplings in this fantasy one of yours?
I'm sorry, Stocky, but no. No place for them in a grounded North London adventure starting in Waitrose.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
Morgoth wasn’t in LoTR, only the backstory.
I say it counts as backstory is story. So you can have Morgoths big spider friend as well.
Ungoliant is mentioned in the LoTR as well, as the ancestor of Shelob
By similar logic, would he support an invasion of Greece by Turkey to reunite the Ottoman Empire?
Is "murderous, inexcusable and very stupid" a new way of indicating support?
I don't get this at all. He is just saying that Taiwan can self determine, surely? I suppose that leaves the door open for PRC to invade and say that was so obviously what the majority of the Taiwanese wanted that a referendum was superfluous.
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
A very interesting discussion. All betting is different. General election betting based on any number of opinion polls now is like betting on a horse race to take place in 2 year's time on the basis of yesterday's race result.
The big factors, it seems to me, are:
Do you know what you are talking about. (Don't bet on Belgian politics unless you understand Belgium. Don't bet on things where you find behaviour incomprehensible)
Do you get human nature, and do you have antennae for the spirit of the times? (C&A at 20/1 was a simple gift of cash from those who didn't to those who did. What was blindingly obvious to some was completely opaque to others).
Can you estimate how groups of people are likely to react.
Can you put your own preferences aside. Do you understand that being right, good, decent, sensible, experienced or qualified collectively is no grounds whatever for being elected by anyone for anything.
No-one has made much money - yet - by betting on Boris to lose.
That’s a really good point, am I to some degree betting on Libdems because I vote for them.
Do you think general elections results can be known weeks in advance, or if another one was held a couple of weeks later it would have quite a different result? For a great many people it could be random exactly how they vote from one week to the next. Also a general election two weeks later could have a different result and different people taking part in the knowledge how the the first one went? Could we have three general elections in six weeks and put this to the test?
Sadly having three GEs in 6 weeks fails to test the issue, as the facts of GE 1 alter the circumstances for GE 2 and so on - as you acknowledge. You would need access to parallel universes to try it out simultaneously but with the same electorate. The technology for this is unavailable. The next best technology available is Sir John Curtice, but he only tells you the result after the polls have closed.
BTW 'known' is a high bar to clear. People don't offer odds on matters which can 'known' in advance. Especially bookies.
I have a friend who used to get right on the winning post so if it was waiting for a photo finish he was sure who had won so rushed to place a bet! But he was wrong nearly every time.
I think he got that idea from a fiction book without realising it was fiction.
If he was wrong nearly every time then you could have cleaned up by betting on the other horse.
I wan’t quick enough to think of that. It’s a clear trend! He’s stopped now anyway.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Would you keep the breastydumplings in this fantasy one of yours?
I'm sorry, Stocky, but no. No place for them in a grounded North London adventure starting in Waitrose.
OTOH they can be found in the seasonal dim sum fridge, surely? (Getting hungry just thinking of dim sum.)
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
The Lion, the witch and the cheese counter.
Yes, that has the right sort of vibe. Not sure about this 'intending to vote LibDem' thing from you btw. That's a pretty odd way to introduce yourself. Most people try and make themselves look more exciting than they really are.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
By similar logic, would he support an invasion of Greece by Turkey to reunite the Ottoman Empire?
Is "murderous, inexcusable and very stupid" a new way of indicating support?
I don't get this at all. He is just saying that Taiwan can self determine, surely? I suppose that leaves the door open for PRC to invade and say that was so obviously what the majority of the Taiwanese wanted that a referendum was superfluous.
He is engaging in desperate whataboutery so that he can say that the US is worse than China (because of invading Iraq) if China attacks Taiwan, so that he had an excuse for not taking sides in a China-US conflict over Taiwan.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
that there are lots of posh seats where people vote LD is just the right numbers to both feel good and make sure there is a Tory government that won't bash the rich.
The poshest seats in the country are generally no longer safe Tory seats but Tory-LD marginals now after Brexit eg that includes Esher and Walton, Cities of London and Westminster, Chelsea and Fulham, Finchley and Golders Green, Richmond Park, Oxford West and Abingdon, Winchester, Cheltenham, Tunbridge Wells, Guildford etc
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
Tits and Dragon’s we called it. Can I say that?
Out of all the baddies in Lord of the Rings, which one was baddest?
Sauron. Was that a trick question?
Morgoth. Sauron was cosplaying Morgoth, and was basically working for him on a zero hours contract.
Morgoth wasn’t in LoTR, only the backstory.
He gets mentioned at the Council - and that Sauron is just a flunky.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because they know that voting for somebody else in by elections etc will not change a government - they just want to voice disapproval .
I understand, but the pattern is give government majority, give them lots of disapproval, then give them another majority or even bigger one. To me that doesn’t make sense. Is it just me?
Paddy Power has Libdems 5-2 so I will place my first political bet. Because I think there is going to be obvious vote of disapproval. But if it was a general election I would bet Conservatives for another majority I think.
You can get 7/2 with William Hill. Golden rule: always take the best odds. (You may get even better on the exchanges.)
Thanks for the tip! I have the Paddy Power app. This may be where some bookies better for different types of betting?
If you want to be a serious punter, you must have accounts with all bookies and exchanges to efficiently seek the best odds. Unfortunately, I have four trad book who limit my stakes to paltry sums.
Yes, a Catch 22, that. To be a serious regular winning punter you need lots of accounts but if you're a serious regular winning punter you can't have them.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
I've been eligible for almost a whole day and *still* no text message from the quacks. Bloody NHS.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
The Lion, the witch and the cheese counter.
Yes, that has the right sort of vibe. Not sure about this 'intending to vote LibDem' thing from you btw. That's a pretty odd way to introduce yourself. Most people try and make themselves look more exciting than they really are.
Have you been up Kinabalu? As you were looking up, did you think it looked like a chicken?
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
Ah those same experts who assured us of at least 100k cases without NPIs and called our July unlockdown a "dangerous experiment". Those experts?
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
What facts are we missing? To the government's credit there is an awful lot of data transparency in relation to this. We know there has been a series of peaks and troughs in cases since unlocking, rather than unconstrained exponential growth. We know the booster jab improves protection very significantly, which is not yet baked into the numbers. We know hospitalisations have remained well below previous peaks.
In any case, the decision on Plan B is made by politicians, not scientists.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I thought the "Covid is done" celebrations here were premature, but I also think it's too soon to worry excessively. Basically, as Foxy said the other day, cases are bobbing along at a fairly high level, deaths are pretty low, but hospitalisation remains a serious obstacle for the nHS working properly. Essentially we've moved from having a major death threat for most people to a major capacity threat for our health services. A bit of Plan B wouldn't do any harm, especially reviving the wfh push where practical.
There has been serious pushback at one place that I know where younger, more junior staff were asked to return to the office. They really don't want to.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
The Lion, the witch and the cheese counter.
Yes, that has the right sort of vibe. Not sure about this 'intending to vote LibDem' thing from you btw. That's a pretty odd way to introduce yourself. Most people try and make themselves look more exciting than they really are.
Have you been up Kinabalu? As you were looking up, did you think it looked like a chicken?
That's a couple of No's there. It's still a possible, if I ever get back to Malaysia, but I think I might struggle now. Eg I chickened out of Mam Tor this year. Went for a gentler Tor instead, so gentle it wasn't even a Tor, and was blowing hard and slightly dizzy by halfway on that.
Exceptional stuff from Labour. Big poll lead? Time to send respects and condolences to the family of a suicide bomber who tried to attack a rememberance sunday service.
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
There are always alternatives. Science cannot answer political questions.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
The Lion, the witch and the cheese counter.
Yes, that has the right sort of vibe. Not sure about this 'intending to vote LibDem' thing from you btw. That's a pretty odd way to introduce yourself. Most people try and make themselves look more exciting than they really are.
Have you been up Kinabalu? As you were looking up, did you think it looked like a chicken?
That's a couple of No's there. It's still a possible, if I ever get back to Malaysia, but I think I might struggle now. Eg I chickened out of Mam Tor this year. Went for a gentler Tor instead, so gentle it wasn't even a Tor, and was blowing hard and slightly dizzy by halfway on that.
You need to run the lengths and walk the widths.
Not a chicken sorry, a cock. The rock face at the top. Not the summit, the bit at the very top. I thought it did. ;o
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
I hope you are right. I am not quite as convinced as you, but I am not soiling myself, either
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
Ah those same experts who assured us of at least 100k cases without NPIs and called our July unlockdown a "dangerous experiment". Those experts?
Lol the person who was quoted saying "we could hit 100k a day" was Health Secretary Sajid Javed. As always when we avoid the worst scenarios that exist people attack the need for scenario modelling.
The simple reality is that a few people on here including your good self think you know better because your view is always the correct view (the Ballestre Edict).
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I thought the "Covid is done" celebrations here were premature, but I also think it's too soon to worry excessively. Basically, as Foxy said the other day, cases are bobbing along at a fairly high level, deaths are pretty low, but hospitalisation remains a serious obstacle for the nHS working properly. Essentially we've moved from having a major death threat for most people to a major capacity threat for our health services. A bit of Plan B wouldn't do any harm, especially reviving the wfh push where practical.
There has been serious pushback at one place that I know where younger, more junior staff were asked to return to the office. They really don't want to.
I think people were saying that Covid is done as a national emergency as it becomes endemic and we live with a new flavour of viral infection now, thanks to the jabs, not dissimilar from "influenza and pneumonia" in terms of lethality.
And as such to be lived with, with the NHS ensuring as best it can that it accommodates patients with Covid just as it has done and does for patients with influenza and pneumonia.
I don't think anyone thinks or has said on here that Covid itself is over.
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
But we have had a high case rate through the summer, and Covid has ripped through our kids. That’s not true of the Netherlands (or other continental countries). That is the theory underlying UK herd immunity
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
What facts are we missing? To the government's credit there is an awful lot of data transparency in relation to this. We know there has been a series of peaks and troughs in cases since unlocking, rather than unconstrained exponential growth. We know the booster jab improves protection very significantly, which is not yet baked into the numbers. We know hospitalisations have remained well below previous peaks.
In any case, the decision on Plan B is made by politicians, not scientists.
The data is all of the performance data within the NHS. We won't be pulling the Plan B lever for any other reason than to prevent a swamping of the health service. We know it is in a much worse position than 12 months ago so a smaller surge in hospitalisation would do it.
As for politicians making decisions, its likely my spectral brain not linking inconsistencies. Either we are following the science or politicians make the decisions. The same people have make the two clashing positions at different times to suit themselves.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
It will be 'over' - as in Covid become background rather than news - by Feb imo. And I think there's little chance of a plan B being activated. But it's crazy to rule it out. If the NHS gets too stressed to maintain essential minimum standards the govt should act. Course they should. It's what they're there for.
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
But we have had a high case rate through the summer, and Covid has ripped through our kids. That’s not true of the Netherlands (or other continental countries). That is the theory underlying UK herd immunity
I am hoping it is more than theory. Covid tends laugh in the face of explication.
Meanwhile, I need to figure out how to get a booster shot after 5, not 6 months, because I am leaving the country two weeks before my 6 week milestone…
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
It will be 'over' - as in Covid become background rather than news - by Feb imo. And I think there's little chance of a plan B being activated. But it's crazy to rule it out. If the NHS gets too stressed to maintain essential minimum standards the govt should act. Course they should. It's what they're there for.
If it comes to it they must try vaxports and masks before any kind of lockdown or WFH
Why should I give up my freedoms because of idiot antivaxxers? Why should our cities and our economy take another massive hit because of THEM?
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
We've had 7-8m infections in England since the start of May according to the ONS. That's the difference, Foxy. Countries that have tried to delay their exit waves to a significant degree or have got poor vaccination rates are seeing gigantic spikes in their infection rates as winter gives all respiratory viruses transmission advantages.
You mentioned Narcos Mexico the other day. I admit that Narcos has passed me by.
Is Narcos Mexico a sequel, i.e. should I watch Narcos first?
They weirdly overlap, to the extent they have the same actors doing the same roles, yet in different dramas. Chapo also overlaps. It’s all quite confusing
That said, it is excellent. I watched the final episode of series 3 last night. Bleak but compelling. The guy who plays the bad cop turned good is a tremendous actor
It's a yawning gap in my TV best ever drama portfolio so I'll give it ago. I've also not seen Game of Thrones or Mad Men.
I only watch free to view and I waiting for game of thrones to get there. I'll be the last on the planet to see it. The anticipation though.
You won't. I will be. As one by one the stars fall out the sky I'll still be giving it a miss.
Why?
Just totally not my scene. I can like fantasy but not of that type.
Trouble is it's 3 different things. Mainly, and the best bit, it's medieval dynastic warfare with no fantasy element. Secondly there's the white walkers in the north which are sort of Tolkienish and the acceptable face of fantasy to me. And thirdly there's that unbearably silly woman with her sodding dragons.
I'm sure it was big for a good reason. It's me at fault really. The further something gets from the here & the now, stuff I can relate to, the better it has to be for me to be able to get into it. Eg my perfect drama would be set in 2021 and take place in North London, with the lead character a 61 year old bloke who goes to Waitrose most days, and maybe on one of those days falls into an adventure, but a grounded adventure, not a fantastical one.
Would you keep the breastydumplings in this fantasy one of yours?
I'm sorry, Stocky, but no. No place for them in a grounded North London adventure starting in Waitrose.
OTOH they can be found in the seasonal dim sum fridge, surely? (Getting hungry just thinking of dim sum.)
I love dim sum too. Mind you, there's not much I don't like on the food front. I'm the very opposite of a picky eater.
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
I give it a week before there are loud calls for "Plan B" from the usual suspects.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Plan B is and always was something that the people in the know deploy when in their view there is no alternative. Their view based on science, medical knowledge and in full possession of the facts. It isn't what me and thee who don't know the facts think that matters.
What facts are we missing? To the government's credit there is an awful lot of data transparency in relation to this. We know there has been a series of peaks and troughs in cases since unlocking, rather than unconstrained exponential growth. We know the booster jab improves protection very significantly, which is not yet baked into the numbers. We know hospitalisations have remained well below previous peaks.
In any case, the decision on Plan B is made by politicians, not scientists.
The data is all of the performance data within the NHS. We won't be pulling the Plan B lever for any other reason than to prevent a swamping of the health service. We know it is in a much worse position than 12 months ago so a smaller surge in hospitalisation would do it.
As for politicians making decisions, its likely my spectral brain not linking inconsistencies. Either we are following the science or politicians make the decisions. The same people have make the two clashing positions at different times to suit themselves.
"Following the science" was merely a soundbite to give Boris credibility and make political decisions sound inevitable.
Science can't tell you how best to implement public policy in such a complex situation. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand the limitations of science.
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
But we have had a high case rate through the summer, and Covid has ripped through our kids. That’s not true of the Netherlands (or other continental countries). That is the theory underlying UK herd immunity
I am hoping it is more than theory. Covid tends laugh in the face of explication.
Meanwhile, I need to figure out how to get a booster shot after 5, not 6 months, because I am leaving the country two weeks before my 6 week milestone…
You will still be eligible if you come and visit the UK so assuming you aren't leaving forever you can book your appointment for when you're around.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
Perhaps. But despite reports that the taxi driver locked him in and then got out before the device exploded, the video clearly shows that the device went off first and the driver got out afterwards.
Yes the sequence is there. Just not sure that we have seen that MO before. Not to say it couldn't be done.
Actually timers have been used on suicide bombers for a long time, especially in conflict zones like in the Middle East.
Putting a timer on a suicide vest makes it much less likely for the bomber to chicken out at the last minute as they've got no trigger to press.
If there was a timer on this one then it certainly points to the person who blew up being a pawn and not the mastermind of the attack.
Hmm.
My first pass: somehow the taxi driver realised that the guy was up to no good, and confronted him and/or locked the doors at which point the guy triggered the device. Which then maybe partialled although that's some force we saw in the blast and might have directed upwards.
But we shall see.
I THINK, although I may well be wrong, that on many taxis the driver can lock the passenger doors remotely. Stops people doing a runner and so on.
Most cars have child locks that do that for the back. Perspex barrier to passengers might have helped too.
Possibly, although given the windscreen was blown out in the explosion, I suspect it was more likely the seat and headrest etc that provided the initial protection.
Remarkable he survived though considering it does seem he was still in the vehicle when it happened despite earlier reports.
Even more remarkable that the prognosis is so good. Not "lifechanging". Which I don't like as a term, but can see the medical utility. Not sure how having survived a suicide bomb in the back of your car can be anything other than lifechanging. Would certainly give me pause for thought.
Not many people can have come so close to a suicide bomber's explosion and lived to tell the tale.
Remarkable. Weirdly both extremely unfortunate and extremely fortunate simultaneously.
There was a story several years ago about a guy who, bizarrely, just happened to have been at the scene of three separate IRA bombings.
I can't think of which crashes they were, but I have a feeling someone was unfortunate enough to be involved in two train crashes.
There was a child in America who survived a plane crash that killed his mom, brother and sister only to then survive a second plane crash years later that claimed the life of his dad and stepmom.
The estimated odds of surviving two plane crashes that claim the lives of multiple people is one in more than a quadrillion.
"A proposed Northern Powerhouse route from Leeds to Manchester is now expected to be made up of some new line, but it will mostly consist of upgrades to the existing track.
The new track on the route will not allow high-speed rail travel.
The route is not expected to go via Bradford, a key request of many in the city and surrounding area."
In other words we might get the very worst bits bypassed but mostly its going to be easing of curves and some grade separation. Q Can we at least have electric trains for fast acceleration and tilt for the curves? A No
Vote Conservative all you red wallers! Even the "Trams for Leeds" bribe spun hard in the Sunday Times is now "The government is also expected to put money aside to explore setting up a tram service for Leeds."
Nearly 20,000 cases in Holland. By far their worst day yet, in all the pandemic
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
That's the difference between what's happening in countries without any real natural immunity reserves and the UK. All of them that have tried to displace infections from the summer are going to have a really difficult time of it now.
Considering how the Netherlands was hit in the first waves and their vaccine roll out coverage is as good as ours on Worldometer, I don't think there will be much difference on herd immunity.
We've had 7-8m infections in England since the start of May according to the ONS. That's the difference, Foxy. Countries that have tried to delay their exit waves to a significant degree or have got poor vaccination rates are seeing gigantic spikes in their infection rates as winter gives all respiratory viruses transmission advantages.
Sure, I get the theory, but apart from being a vector children's cases are irrelevant in nearly all cases.
We are seeing a lot of breakthrough cases in the double vaxxed. We have 60 or so inpatients in that subgroup, bad enough to be inpatients. I don't think herd immunity is as robust as some make out.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
that there are lots of posh seats where people vote LD is just the right numbers to both feel good and make sure there is a Tory government that won't bash the rich.
The poshest seats in the country are generally no longer safe Tory seats but Tory-LD marginals now after Brexit eg that includes Esher and Walton, Cities of London and Westminster, Chelsea and Fulham, Finchley and Golders Green, Richmond Park, Oxford West and Abingdon, Winchester, Cheltenham, Tunbridge Wells, Guildford etc
I'm not sure I'd call Tunbridge Wells (maj 14,700) or Chelsea and Fulham (maj 11,200) exactly marginal. Some of the others (Finchley, Cheltenham) have been marginals long before Brexit, while Guildford and Winchester have been LibDem in the early 2000s.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
You haven't? JP Morgan moved about 15 roles out of London and it got a lot of play.
Edit - Unilever was another one, it got loads of airtime when it was heading to the Netherlands and suddenly it wasn't so it stopped making the news.
Naughty. It was nearly 10x that.
Not a huge dent in the global JP workforce, that said.
The Shell move is interesting, since they tried this once before and were beaten back by a massive storm of protest in politics in the Netherlands.
Interesting that they think they should try again.
At what point do the Netherlands (and Ireland) realise they’ve been sold down the river by the EU on corporation tax rates and tax avoidance strategies?
This uptick in cases is getting a little unnerving
If it gets up above 55000 it will get a little unnerving. At the moment it is just irritating.
Yes, I’m not freaking out. But I was enjoying the 18 days of descending numbers…
Half term effects and now unwinding again. The arguments about HI still stand - most kids have had it, we are boosting the elderly (and soon down to 40-49 year olds) and we have essentially no restictions in play, and the cases are basically wobbling around at 40K a day.
Its likely that the boosters will have a decent effect on hospitals and soon.
So who thinks Lib Dem’s will win the North Shropshire bi election?
Voting against government in mid term but for them again with little change from last general election happens a lot doesn’t it? But why do voters do this?
Because there are zillions of people who'd like to see the LibDems running the country but are put off at a GE because the current system forces a choice between Tory and Labour and frightens them into not 'wasting' their vote, obvs.
that there are lots of posh seats where people vote LD is just the right numbers to both feel good and make sure there is a Tory government that won't bash the rich.
The poshest seats in the country are generally no longer safe Tory seats but Tory-LD marginals now after Brexit eg that includes Esher and Walton, Cities of London and Westminster, Chelsea and Fulham, Finchley and Golders Green, Richmond Park, Oxford West and Abingdon, Winchester, Cheltenham, Tunbridge Wells, Guildford etc
I'm not sure I'd call Tunbridge Wells (maj 14,700) or Chelsea and Fulham (maj 11,200) exactly marginal. Some of the others (Finchley, Cheltenham) have been marginals long before Brexit, while Guildford and Winchester have been LibDem in the early 2000s.
Both Tunbridge Wells and Chelsea and Fulham are in the top 50 LD target seats and not even in the top 100 safest Conservative seats now, which they were comfortably in even in 1997. Indeed in 1997 Kensington and Chelsea was the safest Conservative seat in the country after Huntingdon.
There is only so much that can be gained by micro-analysing recent COVID data, but I was curios so calculated the change in reported cases in England for each day compared to the same day a week earlier.
Comments
The bets have a habit of losing more than 1% of the time.
ETA:-
He had many different ways of beating the bookmaker, but probably his most famous was his success on betting on the result of photo finishes. Unlike today photo finishes would take about 5 minutes to develop so there was always an active betting market on the outcome. Bird very early on noticed that when horses crossed the line together an optical illusion meant that the horse on the far side invariably looked like he had won.
He also discovered a simple technique which meant the illusion didn't occur. He stood at an elevated vantage point as near to the winning post as possible, he would keep very still, close his left eye and create an imaginary line across the track at the finishing line. He used this simple system for the next 20 years to make himself a fortune. With a reported 500 consecutive successful bets.
http://www.bookmakers1.com/alexbird.html
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat
that there are lots of posh seats where people vote LD is just the right numbers to both feel good and make sure there is a Tory government that won't bash the rich.
BREAKING: Court finds Kyle Rittenhouse lawfully carried AR-15 on the night of August 25, 2020 in Kenosha, WI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_John_Priest
(*) And so she should; what a wonderful surname.
It's moral cowardice.
Keep calm and carry on with booster jabs - we'll be up to a quarter of 12+ population with 3 doses in a few days' time. No need for mask mandates or vaccine passports.
Apparently they forgot to get expert testimony on the length of the barrel. No testimony, no evidence, no conviction.
Your using a staple avatar. 😻
I have a feeling their Xmas will get kyboshed
Hungary, of course, used a whole lot of Sputnik and Sinopharm. May be regretting that now
In any case, the decision on Plan B is made by politicians, not scientists.
There has been serious pushback at one place that I know where younger, more junior staff were asked to return to the office. They really don't want to.
My granddaughter at Leeds University is unwell and waiting testing
My two younger grandchildren (10) and (8) again here in Wales were sick last night and they are awaiting test results
And my wife's 82nd birthday party on thursday has been cancelled, and we are keeping ourselves to ourselves !!
Not a chicken sorry, a cock. The rock face at the top. Not the summit, the bit at the very top. I thought it did. ;o
The simple reality is that a few people on here including your good self think you know better because your view is always the correct view (the Ballestre Edict).
And as such to be lived with, with the NHS ensuring as best it can that it accommodates patients with Covid just as it has done and does for patients with influenza and pneumonia.
I don't think anyone thinks or has said on here that Covid itself is over.
“Rosemead Preparatory School and Nursery, which charges up to £4,920 a term, teaches children between the ages of two and 11.“
I’d be livid if I was paying those kind of fees and yet the bloody roof falls in.
As for politicians making decisions, its likely my spectral brain not linking inconsistencies. Either we are following the science or politicians make the decisions. The same people have make the two clashing positions at different times to suit themselves.
A cousins estranged husband is on CPAP up north. I suspect that he was an antivaxxer.
And we have both been double vaccinated, boosted and flu vaccinated
Covid tends laugh in the face of explication.
Meanwhile, I need to figure out how to get a booster shot after 5, not 6 months, because I am leaving the country two weeks before my 6 week milestone…
Why should I give up my freedoms because of idiot antivaxxers? Why should our cities and our economy take another massive hit because of THEM?
New Thread
Science can't tell you how best to implement public policy in such a complex situation. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't understand the limitations of science.
"A proposed Northern Powerhouse route from Leeds to Manchester is now expected to be made up of some new line, but it will mostly consist of upgrades to the existing track.
The new track on the route will not allow high-speed rail travel.
The route is not expected to go via Bradford, a key request of many in the city and surrounding area."
In other words we might get the very worst bits bypassed but mostly its going to be easing of curves and some grade separation.
Q Can we at least have electric trains for fast acceleration and tilt for the curves?
A No
Vote Conservative all you red wallers! Even the "Trams for Leeds" bribe spun hard in the Sunday Times is now "The government is also expected to put money aside to explore setting up a tram service for Leeds."
We are seeing a lot of breakthrough cases in the double vaxxed. We have 60 or so inpatients in that subgroup, bad enough to be inpatients. I don't think herd immunity is as robust as some make out.
This thread not making it to 16 November is moving up the betting. But DYOR
Its likely that the boosters will have a decent effect on hospitals and soon.
1. Monday: 32,081
2. Tuesday: 28,531
3. Wednesday: 31,317
4. Thursday: 30,166
5. Friday: 28,490
6. Saturday: 26,250
7. Sunday: 23,779 -20%
8. Monday: 24,979 -28%
9. Tuesday: 27,872 -2%
10. Wednesday: 35,541 +12%
11. Thursday: 35,472 +15%
12. Friday: 33,155 +15%
13. Saturday: 33,493 +12%
14. Sunday: 29,404 +19%
15. Monday: 31,440 +22%
I don't think this shows much, but as I have typed it out I thought I would share.