Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
Speaking of religious conversions-of-convenience, can someone run through the logic of Boris's annulled marriages again? Or Tony Blair's undercover Catholicism?
Boris was baptised a Catholic but abandoned it and was confirmed into the CoE. His previous two marriages were not in church so under canon law his marriage to Carrie was his first proper one. Quite why they ignored his adultery - and hers - and his procuring abortions for his mistress beats me. But there you go.
On names, I have a complicated name which hardly anyone ever gets right. Same for both my parents. I have never been called by the first name on my birth certificate but this seems to follow a family tradition. All my Irish aunties had lovely names but when we were doing a family tree a few years back we discovered that their given names were very different and that my grandparents had simply recycled the same two names using them alternately.
Kevin on the other hand is a lovely name in Ireland and Brittany. It is the name of an Irish saint and, over there, does not have the same connotations that the snobby English have assigned to it.
Finally, on politics, I do think that the decision to scrap the rail improvements in the North - a manifesto commitment - is going to hit the Tories much harder than sleaze and will not do much for Sunak's chances. Typical "penny wise, pound foolish" policies from the Tories coupled with a broken promise. A bad move.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
So you are saying we, UK, may be culpable in some way? I’m not having a go or saying you are wrong. A lot of them do seem to be Kurdish at the moment.
Maybe key bit we are overlooking, did we really help the Kurd’s after they bore brunt of fighting for us against ISIS? Or is lots of Kurds now pawns in Baltic woods or giving all their savings to gangsters to risk it in the channel, seeking to live somewhere safe they can build a life again Could we have done more to help refugee Kurds live where they came from, and made it better for everyone except gangsters and other bad friends of Putin?
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Also, we know where people *say* they are from, not where they are actually from. Determining someone's actual origin is a long and complex process.
Speaking of religious conversions-of-convenience, can someone run through the logic of Boris's annulled marriages again? Or Tony Blair's undercover Catholicism?
Boris was baptised a Catholic but abandoned it and was confirmed into the CoE. His previous two marriages were not in church so under canon law his marriage to Carrie was his first proper one. Quite why they ignored his adultery - and hers - and his procuring abortions for his mistress beats me. But there you go.
On names, I have a complicated name which hardly anyone ever gets right. Same for both my parents. I have never been called by the first name on my birth certificate but this seems to follow a family tradition. All my Irish aunties had lovely names but when we were doing a family tree a few years back we discovered that their given names were very different and that my grandparents had simply recycled the same two names using them alternately.
Kevin on the other hand is a lovely name in Ireland and Brittany. It is the name of an Irish saint and, over there, does not have the same connotations that the snobby English have assigned to it.
Finally, on politics, I do think that the decision to scrap the rail improvements in the North - a manifesto commitment - is going to hit the Tories much harder than sleaze and will not do much for Sunak's chances. Typical "penny wise, pound foolish" policies from the Tories coupled with a broken promise. A bad move.
Cyclefree is quite right about the convoluted RC Canon law which makes Boris's marriage possible in an RC church. At the same time millions of lifelong catholics are denied the sacrament because they have remarried after a divorce. All this is, of course, absurd.
What is not absurd is marrying people in church who have a past and lots of baggage. This is pretty universal and is called the human condition. The church exists to forgive and help people move on.
Boris has many faults, and so does the church. What is never a fault is people seeking and the church offering forgiveness.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
On the Yorkshire "Kevin" use, I'd guess that it was used due to it sounding quite similar to "Kaffir", another word that Ballance is alleged to have used (and presumably picked up due to his Zimbabwean background).
Quite shocked by the Ballance stuff. Never known any white person whose family has lived in southern Africa to be at all racist. Ever.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
I think that is both almost completely false and completely true at the same time.
The vast majority of refugees do not reach the rich western countries. They live in vast refugee camps and dire poverty in the countries neighbouring the one they have been forced to flee. Given the conditions, none of them will have been motivated by economic considerations. So I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of refugees are exactly that.
Those refugees who do not stay in refugee camps are clearly motivated by improving their standard of living, given that they will not be in fear of Assad when in Turkey, or of the Myanmar military when in Bangladesh. So the vast majority of refugees who reach Britain will be motivated by economic considerations.
If we cannot make it safe for refugees to return home then we should be taking a fair share.
I retract my previous criticisms of the Church of England, I'm sure @HYUFD will now be espousing disestablishing the Church of England.
The Church of England is facing questions over its role in converting hundreds of asylum seekers, including the Liverpool suicide bomber, to Christianity in an attempt to help them avoid deportation.
Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, is understood to be appalled at the "merry-go-round" of failed asylum seekers changing religion and using other tactics to launch "appeal after appeal" to stay in the country.
The Iraqi man killed in the abortive suicide bomb attack outside Liverpool Women's Hospital is understood to have been helped by the Church in his attempts to avoid being kicked out of Britain, after his claim for asylum was first rejected in 2014.
The Home Office believes changing religion is now "standard practice" among asylum seekers from countries including Iraq "to game the asylum system", as converts claim they are at risk of persecution in their home countries.
That and being told to say they are gay are the two most obvious routes to asylum from shithole but not specifically dangerous countries.
My ex, who worked in immigration law, described the comedy (on occasion) as er.... aggressively homophobic clients would get very worried that, when claiming to be gay, that might have to prove that they were gay.
Which begs the question, how do you prove you are gay?
Like your religion, they *have* to take your word for it. Which is why it is such a handy method of claiming asylum.
Mind you, given the efforts to claim that physical things like age can't be checked....
One point in this - if the church did go through with a fake conversion, they may have fuelled the self-loathing of the individual in question.
Apparently a big thing in radicalisation is the element of "you have corrupted yourself with Western indulgence" - forsaking your faith with a lie would have fed into that.
Christ himself of course came from the Middle East, he was not Western. This man being a Syrian refugee who came to this country via Merkel and Cameron's refugee policy, grew up closer to the lands of the Bible than those Christians in Liverpool are
What has that got to do with the price of fish?
Do you really think that this man was a Christian?
He willingly converted to Christianity, so no reason to suspect otherwise.
As Eek correctly says, it is the immigration service (and the government's) job not to let security risks into this country and to deport those who turn out to be security risks.
That is not the Church's job. The Church's job includes converting souls to Christ
Your God bloke must be a pretty vain snowflake if He cares so much about which church us little people go to when He can't even be bothered to make an appearance more than once every couple of thousand years.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
France and Belgium suffer from civil war, violence and/or repression?
France is a failed state - various refugee agencies/charities state that the conditions for refugees are intolerable there.
Belgium is arguably similar.
We should invade and steal their oil.
On a serious note - my ex who worked both sides of the immigration thing (started out in immigration services, went into private practise) said that while the UK immigration people were often racist (she was first generation African immigration, herself), it was nothing on the French police and immigration officials. In the UK, they seemed to at least pay lip service to being non-racist. In the French system, people were openly racist about the immigrants. In front of her. They seemed to be using the old "educated black people are different" standard of racism, apparently.
A French colleague (an HR consultant) once shocked me by saying "I am surprised white people collect the bins, in France we have Arabs for that". She was working in a multi-ethnic London HR department at the time.
John Rentoul @JohnRentoul · 47m Want to feel old? This is the question @tylercowen has to answer now: “Why is inflation so bad?”
On average the younger you are the less inflation is a problem. It is a problem for cautious people who hold liquid assets. It is not a problem for people who own nothing, and for those who hold debt (for example the government, ex students, people who borrow to buy things they can't afford etc) it is an advantage.
The fact that I can remember well the days when a pint in a pub cost 14p makes me feel a bit wistful. In those far off days the fact that it had once been 2d a pint made no impression.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
I think that is both almost completely false and completely true at the same time.
The vast majority of refugees do not reach the rich western countries. They live in vast refugee camps and dire poverty in the countries neighbouring the one they have been forced to flee. Given the conditions, none of them will have been motivated by economic considerations. So I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of refugees are exactly that.
Those refugees who do not stay in refugee camps are clearly motivated by improving their standard of living, given that they will not be in fear of Assad when in Turkey, or of the Myanmar military when in Bangladesh. So the vast majority of refugees who reach Britain will be motivated by economic considerations.
If we cannot make it safe for refugees to return home then we should be taking a fair share.
You are assuming hat everyone in those camps didn't dream of a better life in "The West" - many do.
I simply think that the 100% refugee is a rarity. much like the 10%% economic migrant. People do things for multiple reasons. Which is why asylum decisions are complex, rather than a rubber stamp.
From that it follows that having some economic reasons for immigration does not invalidate other asylum qualifying reasons.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
Except it really isn't - welcome to Britain, here have part of a Ham and Pineapple Dominos "Pizza".
Our greatest issue here is that are immigration services are far too slow, a lot of money needs to be thrown at the issue to speed things out and actually ship failed migrants home.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
I've been watching the superb French TV series, Spiral recently. Obviously it's a TV series and an exaggeration/pastiche of the French police, but it hints at a culture more in line with 70s/80s UK policing rather than the present day. I've no idea if it is accurate, the system whereby the judiciary and police are far closer than they are in the UK probably leads to a more "robust" system vis a vis asylum seekers, immigrants and so forth mind.
Speaking of religious conversions-of-convenience, can someone run through the logic of Boris's annulled marriages again? Or Tony Blair's undercover Catholicism?
Boris was baptised a Catholic but abandoned it and was confirmed into the CoE. His previous two marriages were not in church so under canon law his marriage to Carrie was his first proper one. Quite why they ignored his adultery - and hers - and his procuring abortions for his mistress beats me. But there you go.
On names, I have a complicated name which hardly anyone ever gets right. Same for both my parents. I have never been called by the first name on my birth certificate but this seems to follow a family tradition. All my Irish aunties had lovely names but when we were doing a family tree a few years back we discovered that their given names were very different and that my grandparents had simply recycled the same two names using them alternately.
Kevin on the other hand is a lovely name in Ireland and Brittany. It is the name of an Irish saint and, over there, does not have the same connotations that the snobby English have assigned to it.
Finally, on politics, I do think that the decision to scrap the rail improvements in the North - a manifesto commitment - is going to hit the Tories much harder than sleaze and will not do much for Sunak's chances. Typical "penny wise, pound foolish" policies from the Tories coupled with a broken promise. A bad move.
Cyclefree is quite right about the convoluted RC Canon law which makes Boris's marriage possible in an RC church. At the same time millions of lifelong catholics are denied the sacrament because they have remarried after a divorce. All this is, of course, absurd.
What is not absurd is marrying people in church who have a past and lots of baggage. This is pretty universal and is called the human condition. The church exists to forgive and help people move on.
Boris has many faults, and so does the church. What is never a fault is people seeking and the church offering forgiveness.
I have absolutely no problem with the holy mother church giving the PM absolution and marrying him in church. I do have a problem that they don't do the same for anyone who isn't the PM.
"Our governments have no desire to be adversarial, or seek in any way to strategically encircle or undermine the Russian Federation. We are concerned by Russia’s military build-up and activity around the borders of Ukraine."
Ooh... Baldy Ben is 'concerned'... Putin must be shitting himself.
I reckon the Belarus/Poland business could easily turn hot very quickly. All it would take is a jittery gopnik or dreisarz to send a few rounds through the wire and it'd be on like Fat Pat's Thong.
I think Baldy Ben is a dark horse for the Con leadership if Rishi somehow self-immolates and the prospect of Truss fails to send a shiver. He has quite an impressive "real-world" background which would go down well with party members.
He needs a bigger job first. Spending a few years staring at the MoD Excel document which makes no fucking sense whatsoever is not a traditional stepping stone to the job of PM.
Defence Secretary is a pretty prestigious job so far as Conservative members are concerned. As I recall Hague, IDS and Cameron neither shadowed the big portfolios or occupied them in Govt before becoming leader. So not an insuperable problem. Very much depends on the circumstances of Boris's departure and what the Party is looking for at that time.
Germany's covid-19 death rate is higher than Britain's for the first time since the summer. Britain's case rate remains higher - but higher share of vaxxed means stronger decoupling effect.....
The biggest difference, though, appears to be in attitudes. Germany is in full panic mode ahead of tomorrow's meeting of federal and state leaders. After celebrating "Freedom Day" in July, the UK appears broadly to have accepted the costs that accompany its liberty.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
I've been watching the superb French TV series, Spiral recently. Obviously it's a TV series and an exaggeration/pastiche of the French police, but it hints at a culture more in line with 70s/80s UK policing rather than the present day. I've no idea if it is accurate, the system whereby the judiciary and police are far closer than they are in the UK probably leads to a more "robust" system vis a vis asylum seekers, immigrants and so forth mind.
Spiral is very good indeed. Better than any of the Scandi-Noirs.
Speaking of religious conversions-of-convenience, can someone run through the logic of Boris's annulled marriages again? Or Tony Blair's undercover Catholicism?
Boris was baptised a Catholic but abandoned it and was confirmed into the CoE. His previous two marriages were not in church so under canon law his marriage to Carrie was his first proper one. Quite why they ignored his adultery - and hers - and his procuring abortions for his mistress beats me. But there you go.
On names, I have a complicated name which hardly anyone ever gets right. Same for both my parents. I have never been called by the first name on my birth certificate but this seems to follow a family tradition. All my Irish aunties had lovely names but when we were doing a family tree a few years back we discovered that their given names were very different and that my grandparents had simply recycled the same two names using them alternately.
Kevin on the other hand is a lovely name in Ireland and Brittany. It is the name of an Irish saint and, over there, does not have the same connotations that the snobby English have assigned to it.
Finally, on politics, I do think that the decision to scrap the rail improvements in the North - a manifesto commitment - is going to hit the Tories much harder than sleaze and will not do much for Sunak's chances. Typical "penny wise, pound foolish" policies from the Tories coupled with a broken promise. A bad move.
Cyclefree is quite right about the convoluted RC Canon law which makes Boris's marriage possible in an RC church. At the same time millions of lifelong catholics are denied the sacrament because they have remarried after a divorce. All this is, of course, absurd.
What is not absurd is marrying people in church who have a past and lots of baggage. This is pretty universal and is called the human condition. The church exists to forgive and help people move on.
Boris has many faults, and so does the church. What is never a fault is people seeking and the church offering forgiveness.
Yes - but to be forgiven they are meant to sincerely repent. And have the sacrament of confession. Maybe Boris has and intends being a faithful husband etc.
Repentance and forgiveness are meant to involve some hard self-analysis and a change of behaviour not be the equivalent of a group hug to make you feel better.
Boris's marriage in church stinks because of the Church's utter hypocrisy. There is little evidence of Boris ever having attempted to be a good Catholic. He is a twice divorced man. And yet Catholics who have tried to do their best but are divorced are denied what he so freely got. And don't talk to me about its attitude to gay Catholics. Grrrrr..... 🤬
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
Except it really isn't - welcome to Britain, here have part of a Ham and Pineapple Dominos "Pizza".
Our greatest issue here is that are immigration services are far too slow, a lot of money needs to be thrown at the issue to speed things out and actually ship failed migrants home.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Language barrier is a big issue. English is the second language of much of the world.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
I've been watching the superb French TV series, Spiral recently. Obviously it's a TV series and an exaggeration/pastiche of the French police, but it hints at a culture more in line with 70s/80s UK policing rather than the present day. I've no idea if it is accurate, the system whereby the judiciary and police are far closer than they are in the UK probably leads to a more "robust" system vis a vis asylum seekers, immigrants and so forth mind.
My ex told me of one time she was sent to deal (in France) with some paperwork relating to an asylum claim.
The meeting was interrupted by the noise from next door - some French policemen were giving an immigrant a "passage à tabac" - the preliminary tune up before being questioned.
The chap she was meeting seemed to regard this as perfectly normal. And this was in the early 2000s....
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
He's an amazing musician who can PLAY anything that has strings, think Kitty Jay is my favourite by him. Saw him live in Holmfirth a few years ago. Absolubtely fantastic.
Off-topic, but has anyone seen a hitchiker in the last ten years? I can't remember the last time I did. In my late teens, I'd hitchike regularly, and when I had a car, I'd pick them up on a regular basis.
I remember well the last four Yorkshiremen I picked up.
Still see them in the Highlands. Last one I picked up was a Romanian lad in Bridge of Orczy to Fort William a couple of years ago. I guess motorways and affluence have killed it more generally.
Edit: Orchy, dammit! Orczy is an odd autocorrect.
Yes given you can get bus to london from Glasgow at £11, no need to hitchhike
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
Germany's covid-19 death rate is higher than Britain's for the first time since the summer. Britain's case rate remains higher - but higher share of vaxxed means stronger decoupling effect.....
The biggest difference, though, appears to be in attitudes. Germany is in full panic mode ahead of tomorrow's meeting of federal and state leaders. After celebrating "Freedom Day" in July, the UK appears broadly to have accepted the costs that accompany its liberty.
This is very true. We are basically living completely unrestricted lives other than isolation if you get Covid. Due to high levels of vaccination, most people are not going around being worried about getting Covid. School kids are building up great immunity to it through mild infections. Boosters are kicking in.
I would not be surprised to see most of Europe in lockdown for Christmas. I can't see it happening here.
Bridget Phillipson has been backed for next Labour leader, according to Star Sports' weekly Polling Station video. There is still some 33/1 available at Skybet and Ladbrokes; Bet365 have cut her from 50/1 into 20/1; 14.5 on Betfair. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf5Dwy11uQ4
Note: this is information, not a tip. I've not bothered to think about it. As William Kedjanyi notes, Starmer is surrounded by better media performers than him.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
I retract my previous criticisms of the Church of England, I'm sure @HYUFD will now be espousing disestablishing the Church of England.
The Church of England is facing questions over its role in converting hundreds of asylum seekers, including the Liverpool suicide bomber, to Christianity in an attempt to help them avoid deportation.
Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, is understood to be appalled at the "merry-go-round" of failed asylum seekers changing religion and using other tactics to launch "appeal after appeal" to stay in the country.
The Iraqi man killed in the abortive suicide bomb attack outside Liverpool Women's Hospital is understood to have been helped by the Church in his attempts to avoid being kicked out of Britain, after his claim for asylum was first rejected in 2014.
The Home Office believes changing religion is now "standard practice" among asylum seekers from countries including Iraq "to game the asylum system", as converts claim they are at risk of persecution in their home countries.
That and being told to say they are gay are the two most obvious routes to asylum from shithole but not specifically dangerous countries.
My ex, who worked in immigration law, described the comedy (on occasion) as er.... aggressively homophobic clients would get very worried that, when claiming to be gay, that might have to prove that they were gay.
Which begs the question, how do you prove you are gay?
Like your religion, they *have* to take your word for it. Which is why it is such a handy method of claiming asylum.
Mind you, given the efforts to claim that physical things like age can't be checked....
One point in this - if the church did go through with a fake conversion, they may have fuelled the self-loathing of the individual in question.
Apparently a big thing in radicalisation is the element of "you have corrupted yourself with Western indulgence" - forsaking your faith with a lie would have fed into that.
Christ himself of course came from the Middle East, he was not Western. This man being a Syrian refugee who came to this country via Merkel and Cameron's refugee policy, grew up closer to the lands of the Bible than those Christians in Liverpool are
What has that got to do with the price of fish?
Do you really think that this man was a Christian?
He willingly converted to Christianity, so no reason to suspect otherwise.
As Eek correctly says, it is the immigration service (and the government's) job not to let security risks into this country and to deport those who turn out to be security risks.
That is not the Church's job. The Church's job includes converting souls to Christ
Your God bloke must be a pretty vain snowflake if He cares so much about which church us little people go to when He can't even be bothered to make an appearance more than once every couple of thousand years.
It is conversion to Christ which is key for Christians, not to God alone. It was Christ who appeared 2000 years ago as the Messiah.
If you just convert to God rather than to Christ you could be Muslim or Jewish not just Christian.
Ever since Adam and Eve humanity has largely been responsible for its own condition on earth rather than God
On the Yorkshire "Kevin" use, I'd guess that it was used due to it sounding quite similar to "Kaffir", another word that Ballance is alleged to have used (and presumably picked up due to his Zimbabwean background).
No idea how they got "Kevin" but you just know it comes with a 'looking down upon'. I'm a massive unfan of nicknames in general, racist or not. Your name is an important thing and shouldn't be messed with by other people. Ok, so sometimes a person will like a nickname they're given, but usually they won't. Also they'll sometimes pretend to like it so as to fit in and look a sport. This can then get internalized and they feel even worse about themselves for not being firm and true to themselves. Hence these "why are you speaking about this now when you didn't then?" scenarios. Eg the female Tory MP humiliated by Stanley "slap a filly" Johnson back in 2003. Much of this stuff is about power imbalances and bullying imo rather than innocent banter. And as for names, I really do recommend the simple approach of calling people by their actual name with no arsey riffing around.
We have generally done a lot of testing, with over 1% of the population testing every day. If you think that is a lot then right now in Austria they are testing almost 5% of the population daily which must be a major factor in the number of cases they have. In Denmark it is over 2% of the population.
They are the outliers though, other selected countries test this % of the population daily: - Spain: 0.15% - Germany: 0.2% - France: 0.4%
Austria is only 2.6% positive compared to our 4.4%. Austria only have so many cases due to their massive testing regime. Whereas their near-neighbours in Germany have 16% positive. Clearly the number of reported cases in Germany is a massive under-estimate which explains now why they are seeing higher death rates.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
He's an amazing musician who can PLAY anything that has strings, think Kitty Jay is my favourite by him. Saw him live in Holmfirth a few years ago. Absolubtely fantastic.
This silent prayer...
Prefer Nancy Kerr personally but then again she is a friend.
Seth Lakeman's tour in December has support from Winter Mountain who are really good...
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
It occurred to me yesterday that our present immigration system is like Squid Game, played across Europe. Purely Darwinian
First you have to get out of your hellhole country. Then you need the cash and nous to get into the EU across some sea or border. Then you have to traverse all of Europe, evading hassle, camp out in Calais for weeks. And then you have to cross one of the busiest sea lanes in the world
To do all that without dying or giving up you have to be strong, smart and bloody determined. Probably an ideal immigrant. Young and ambitious. Unlikely to immediately turn to a lazy life of crime, more likely to start a business and make money
I think we should encourage more Channel crossings, but maybe make them a bit harder. Like in Squid Game.
Germany's covid-19 death rate is higher than Britain's for the first time since the summer. Britain's case rate remains higher - but higher share of vaxxed means stronger decoupling effect.....
The biggest difference, though, appears to be in attitudes. Germany is in full panic mode ahead of tomorrow's meeting of federal and state leaders. After celebrating "Freedom Day" in July, the UK appears broadly to have accepted the costs that accompany its liberty.
This is very true. We are basically living completely unrestricted lives other than isolation if you get Covid. Due to high levels of vaccination, most people are not going around being worried about getting Covid. School kids are building up great immunity to it through mild infections. Boosters are kicking in.
I would not be surprised to see most of Europe in lockdown for Christmas. I can't see it happening here.
Pub was pretty busy last night and curry house was rammed. Good for them - they both need the pick up in trade, but the days when I could go with a couple of mates mid week and sit in an empty room and have full waiter attention seem to have passed.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
It occurred to me yesterday that our present immigration system is like Squid Game, played across Europe. Purely Darwinian
First you have to get out of your hellhole country. Then you need the cash and nous to get into the EU across some sea or border. Then you have to traverse all of Europe, evading hassle, camp out in Calais for weeks. And then you have to cross one of the busiest sea lanes in the world
To do all that without dying or giving up you have to be strong, smart and bloody determined. Probably an ideal immigrant. Young and ambitious. Unlikely to immediately turn to a lazy life of crime, more likely to start a business and make money
I think we should encourage more Channel crossings, but maybe make them a bit harder. Like in Squid Game.
Problem is a minority of them could also be equally determined jihadis
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
Just a spooky coincidence, of the kind to send a shiver down @Leon 's spine.
Rachael Venables @rachaelvenables · 35m BREAKING: Nine Insulate Britain activists are being jailed immediately for breach of an Injunction, barring them from protesting on the M25. Most are getting four months in prison. Ben Taylor gets six months for telling the Judge he would block the motorway again. @LBC
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
On the Yorkshire "Kevin" use, I'd guess that it was used due to it sounding quite similar to "Kaffir", another word that Ballance is alleged to have used (and presumably picked up due to his Zimbabwean background).
No idea how they got "Kevin" but you just know it comes with a 'looking down upon'. I'm a massive unfan of nicknames in general, racist or not. Your name is an important thing and shouldn't be messed with by other people. Ok, so sometimes a person will like a nickname they're given, but usually they won't. Also they'll sometimes pretend to like it so as to fit in and look a sport. This can then get internalized and they feel even worse about themselves for not being firm and true to themselves. Hence these "why are you speaking about this now when you didn't then?" scenarios. Eg the female Tory MP humiliated by Stanley "slap a filly" Johnson back in 2003. Much of this stuff is about power imbalances and bullying imo rather than innocent banter. And as for names, I really do recommend the simple approach of calling people by their actual name with no arsey riffing around.
I think the similar sounds thing is important. It means once the nickname is established it can be exchanged for the racial slur with plausible deniability - "I didn't say Kaffir, I said Kevin - it's his nickname"
Did you ever wonder why John Barnes got the nickname "Digger"?
Was it really just because there happened to be a (old white man) character in Dallas called Digger Barnes?
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
It occurred to me yesterday that our present immigration system is like Squid Game, played across Europe. Purely Darwinian
First you have to get out of your hellhole country. Then you need the cash and nous to get into the EU across some sea or border. Then you have to traverse all of Europe, evading hassle, camp out in Calais for weeks. And then you have to cross one of the busiest sea lanes in the world
To do all that without dying or giving up you have to be strong, smart and bloody determined. Probably an ideal immigrant. Young and ambitious. Unlikely to immediately turn to a lazy life of crime, more likely to start a business and make money
I think we should encourage more Channel crossings, but maybe make them a bit harder. Like in Squid Game.
Presumably someone who virtually crapped their pants over going to a gig would be out at the first hurdle, blood all over their fetching green track suit.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Protection against illness/death is granted by the first two jabs, and the booster counts as a pseudo-infection. Basically we should be OK for the winter providing we can keep belting out boosters.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
It can be true both that Johnson is an untrustworthy and irresponsible leader who has made the situation worse and that the deal he signed (which he claimed was great and won an election to ratify) really does threaten the very peace settlement in Northern Ireland that it was meant to protect. What is more, if this is the case, the EU must share some responsibility for the mess, for the deal was made as much in Europe as in Britain.
Re: Comments made by Cummings that Johnson/Frost always intended to trigger A16 suggests the EU were foolhardy to take Johnson's/Frost's word (or signatures) as their bond. So yes it is their fault too.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
The universe is full of amazing coincidences, nothing odd about that.
Am I being too cynical to find it an incredible coincidence that only a day or two after COP 26 ends the insulate protesters finally get caught and put in prison for injunction busting?
Some horrendous case rates coming out of Central Europe, as @another_richard says
Peak Pandemic, there
No doubt iSAGE will be telling us soon that this wave will smash over UK unless we do a pre-emptive lockdown now etc etc.
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
A day off and a confession from your old pal Mr Stodge - forty years ago, I was living In Denmark and while my Danish experience isn't that of @NickPalmer and especially @kingbongo, I was at the Odder Hojskole (Folk HIgh School literally) for two terms.
I went back a couple of times after and I can probably hold my own in a Danish conversation even now.
Last evening's Danish local elections piqued my interest in political events in the Odder Kommune (Council). When I was there, the Forstander (Head Teacher) of the Hojskole was the Deputy Mayor and he went on to become the full Mayor (Borgmester) a few years later. The Mayoralty was exchanged between the Venstre and Social Democrats but it's been held by Venstre since 2014.
Despite being clear top of the poll, Uffe Jensen, who had been the mayor since 2014, is out because the governing Conservative-Venstre-Folkeparti coalition lost its majority as one Folkeparti seat went to the Radikale Venstre.
The split is now 10-9 to the "red" grouping of Social Democrats (5), Radical Venstre (2), Enhedslisten (2) and Socialist Folkeparti (1). They outvote Venstre (7) and the Conservatives (2).
The live blog follows all the typical excitement of a night at a local election count when control switches from one party/group/bloc to another.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
Well, lots of people on here do that every day, don't they?
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
This is one of those charts which doesn't really help at all. If a country got those cases spread equally or got them all in one day would make a massive difference. You have to know the context for it to be useful.
The context is that we have spread our cases out fairly evenly over that time period, building immunity through infection and not overwhelming health services. Whereas other countries are getting a huge spike now with cases in a much shorter time frame which risks causing issues with healthcare and could end up in lockdowns.
Rachael Venables @rachaelvenables · 35m BREAKING: Nine Insulate Britain activists are being jailed immediately for breach of an Injunction, barring them from protesting on the M25. Most are getting four months in prison. Ben Taylor gets six months for telling the Judge he would block the motorway again. @LBC
Finally one group of them gets locked up! Took them bloody long enough.
Agreeing the precise form is the problem in making further changes at all. Even just selecting entirely elected doesnt resolve that as you then need to get into the details on terms, powers et al.
I think its hilarious we are still replacing the 'temporary' hereditary peers from the 90s.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
Well, lots of people on here do that every day, don't they?
To be fair she does add this:"(yes there are some differences in testing)"
It can be true both that Johnson is an untrustworthy and irresponsible leader who has made the situation worse and that the deal he signed (which he claimed was great and won an election to ratify) really does threaten the very peace settlement in Northern Ireland that it was meant to protect. What is more, if this is the case, the EU must share some responsibility for the mess, for the deal was made as much in Europe as in Britain.
Re: Comments made by Cummings that Johnson/Frost always intended to trigger A16 suggests the EU were foolhardy to take Johnson's/Frost's word (or signatures) as their bond. So yes it is their fault too.
The issue goes back to the December 2017 declaration promising to respect North-South and East-West ties. When the UK made proposals on East-West ties the EU simply ignored them - as far as they were concerned that was a UK only problem and nothing to do with the EU - that's why we're in this mess now.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
That's an important statistic (which I for one didn't know). A LOT of people think that we take more migrants than Germany and France.
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
Indeed and we are now at the stage of "living with" the virus in terms of having (for the most part) reduced its personal impact via vaccinations. Were we still absent a vaccine, I'd argue we'd be staring at a new round of restrictions but we aren't and that's entirely (I would argue) down to the vaccines.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
Am I being too cynical to find it an incredible coincidence that only a day or two after COP 26 ends the insulate protesters finally get caught and put in prison for injunction busting?
Hmmm....
Given the problems of delays in the courts I'd think we were fortunate to see them imprisoned this side of 2023.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
Well, lots of people on here do that every day, don't they?
To be fair she does add this:"(yes there are some differences in testing)"
So the countries which have banned testing for COVID are doing awesomely?
And before someone tries, no, you can't just standardise the testing/cases with a bit of multiplication.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
I feel for @Leon. The poor guy is stalked by the pathetic Sean Thomas Knox, be it overseas flint knapping engagements, or in this case, a trip to see a well liked folk musician. Maybe he should contact the police?
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Is she really comparing raw case numbers without comparing testing levels?!?
Well, lots of people on here do that every day, don't they?
To be fair she does add this:"(yes there are some differences in testing)"
Trouble is 'some differences' is nowhere near the whole story.
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
Indeed and we are now at the stage of "living with" the virus in terms of having (for the most part) reduced its personal impact via vaccinations. Were we still absent a vaccine, I'd argue we'd be staring at a new round of restrictions but we aren't and that's entirely (I would argue) down to the vaccines.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
My wife and I received our flu vaccines last week following our boosters the week before
Am I being too cynical to find it an incredible coincidence that only a day or two after COP 26 ends the insulate protesters finally get caught and put in prison for injunction busting?
Hmmm....
Given the problems of delays in the courts I'd think we were fortunate to see them imprisoned this side of 2023.
Judges don't like contempt and it's a very simple case.
People who want it “entirely elected” don’t appear to know what its purpose is.
The first question needs to be, what is the HoL *for*, why is it there? Answer that question, then think about how it should be formed.
A better starting point would be - do we need a second chamber? If we do what should it do? And then after that starting working on it.
The current HoL is one where in theory expertise seats that stops stupid things being implemented by delaying them but is that enough or even a reason for its existence?
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
I feel for @Leon. The poor guy is stalked by the pathetic Sean Thomas Knox, be it overseas flint knapping engagements, or in this case, a trip to see a well liked folk musician. Maybe he should contact the police?
The Union Chapel has obviously let all the SeanTs in. Which must violate their capacity limits...
Do current Delta waves in Europe correlate with temperature change?
Here's a graph for all 35 countries with > 1M population Thread, 1/
Blue is the 7-day mean outdoor temperature. White is the 7-day case ratio (i.e. new cases detected on a given date, divided by new cases detected 7 days earlier). This ratio can also be used as a rough estimation of R (i.e. the number of persons infected by a single case).
Germany's covid-19 death rate is higher than Britain's for the first time since the summer. Britain's case rate remains higher - but higher share of vaxxed means stronger decoupling effect.....
The biggest difference, though, appears to be in attitudes. Germany is in full panic mode ahead of tomorrow's meeting of federal and state leaders. After celebrating "Freedom Day" in July, the UK appears broadly to have accepted the costs that accompany its liberty.
This is very true. We are basically living completely unrestricted lives other than isolation if you get Covid. Due to high levels of vaccination, most people are not going around being worried about getting Covid. School kids are building up great immunity to it through mild infections. Boosters are kicking in.
I would not be surprised to see most of Europe in lockdown for Christmas. I can't see it happening here.
A lot of Europe looks like it’s going to get a bad wave over the winter.
Thankfully for the UK, the combination of a great job on vaccine procurement, very high take-up rates of vaccination, and a government who are naturally minded to be against restrictions, have meant that life should be pretty much normal over the winter. The success of the vaccines in keeping people out of hospital, should mean there’s a low chance of the health service being more overwhelmed than usual over the colder months.
The article is entirely predicated on the basis that we should have as few cases as possible when kids went back to school. He seems to have completely missed the fact that we have been living our lives as normal and building up a good level of immunity. He also seems to have had this article published just as countries who did what he wanted are having massive Covid spikes which risk overwhelming their health systems and going into lockdown.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
That's an important statistic (which I for one didn't know). A LOT of people think that we take more migrants than Germany and France.
One might almost think that parts of the media have deliberately led people to believe that..
The the thread header, yes it’s a bad time for the Tories as they are more likely to lose, but the other side of the coin is that, should they win, they can spin it as a great victory in the face of massive pressure as labour did when they won B&S by a small margin
People who want it “entirely elected” don’t appear to know what its purpose is.
Its function would of course change were it to be elected; legitimacy confers power. I'm not sure that anyone wants that debate, though, since it's easier just to rail against the current, fairly indefensible system.
The present arrangement is an awkward compromise which suits whoever happens to be in government, which is why it persists. Even if it's not entirely without utility.
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
Indeed and we are now at the stage of "living with" the virus in terms of having (for the most part) reduced its personal impact via vaccinations. Were we still absent a vaccine, I'd argue we'd be staring at a new round of restrictions but we aren't and that's entirely (I would argue) down to the vaccines.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
My wife and I received our flu vaccines last week following our boosters the week before
I'm having the both in one go tomorrow. Can I cope with 2 pricks at the same time? Yes, I think so. Done it before, more than once.
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
This is one of those charts which doesn't really help at all. If a country got those cases spread equally or got them all in one day would make a massive difference. You have to know the context for it to be useful.
The context is that we have spread our cases out fairly evenly over that time period, building immunity through infection and not overwhelming health services. Whereas other countries are getting a huge spike now with cases in a much shorter time frame which risks causing issues with healthcare and could end up in lockdowns.
Some European countries also seem to be panicking. For example, the 'in hospital' numbers for the Netherlands are fine. They're at about a tenth of the previous highs, and haven't risen anywhere near as fast as cases. They're basically following a similar path to the UK, where cases shot up, and hospitalisations (while they grew) never really got to dangerous levels. Let me put this in context, the number of people admitted to hospital in the Netherlands was 203 on November 1... and yesterday was... 183.
Now, the speed at which cases in the Netherlands went through the roof really spooked the government. And hospitalisations are a lagging indicator. But if the hospitalisation number remains in that 150 to 200 a day range, then it's really quite manageable for them.
Most of those crossing the channel are genuine refugees not economic migrants.
That kind of thing assumes that people are only one or the other.
Plenty of people live in a shitty country *and* want a better life in economic terms. They could *survive* where they are (possibly), but want something better. So you could have someone whose immigration decision was 60% asylum and 40% economic (say)
And this is why it is a complex issue.
91% of those crossing the channel are from just 10 countries, which all suffer from civil wars, violence and/or repression. There are many many more "shitty" countries in the world than those 10 countries, but their citizens are not the ones showing up on our beaches.
Mainly because they can get to the French beaches without much (or any) air travel.
If we had any kind of land connection with Central and South America, you'd find a lot more people from that part of the world claiming asylum here.
Mexico, for example....
If people were simply looking for economic opportunities, you'd have huge numbers arriving from poor and populous countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh or Nigeria. Instead, you are getting 91% coming from just 10 countries who we know are major sources of refugees owing to civil war, violence and repression.
We are getting plenty of applications from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. And you can make a case for asylum for all of those countries, at least for some groups.
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
The point is the government is saying the people arriving in these boats are mostly economic migrants, and the facts seem to contradict this assertion. Most are genuine refugees.
What facts can you point to? I find it strange that given a choice between refugee status in Germany / France "refugees" spend £000s getting a dangerous boat into England/
Thats the point, are Germany & france dangerous places?
Obviously not since circa ten times the number of refugees that come to the UK/England go to Germany and more than three times as many to France.
That's an important statistic (which I for one didn't know). A LOT of people think that we take more migrants than Germany and France.
Be careful with statistics that count only non-EU migration. But migration is also uneven. It is estimated that half migrants end up in London so there must be vast tracts of the country where there are hardly any.
On topic, Labour don't have a chance in Bexley. If there's one kind of place Boris is likely to be as popular or more than in 2019 it's this constituency. It lies beyond the invisible border (roughly marked by the A2 Blackwall approach in the North and the point where the A20 becomes a dual carriageway) in the outer suburbs that heavily voted for Boris as London Mayor.
HS2 and 3 and the betrayal of the North completely irrelevant; Brexit overwhelmingly popular; employment and business in a healthy state; sleaze likely to be written off as "they're all at it"; Labour viewed with scorn as effete metropolitan woke remainers. And of course a widely popular former MP who died tragically, not someone who resigned as a result of corruption allegations.
The article is entirely predicated on the basis that we should have as few cases as possible when kids went back to school. He seems to have completely missed the fact that we have been living our lives as normal and building up a good level of immunity. He also seems to have had this article published just as countries who did what he wanted are having massive Covid spikes which risk overwhelming their health systems and going into lockdown.
I suspect the preferred plan would have been to vaccinate school children in July but there simply wasn't the capacity to do so then.
Other than that the only thing that could have gone differently would have been a 4 - 5 month window for booster shots not 6 months, but that really is a pedantic point more than anything else.
The truth is that since March 2020 the only solution to Covid is via herd immunity and praying that it doesn't mutate into something else while we get there.
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
Indeed and we are now at the stage of "living with" the virus in terms of having (for the most part) reduced its personal impact via vaccinations. Were we still absent a vaccine, I'd argue we'd be staring at a new round of restrictions but we aren't and that's entirely (I would argue) down to the vaccines.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
My wife and I received our flu vaccines last week following our boosters the week before
I'm having the both in one go tomorrow. Can I cope with 2 pricks at the same time? Yes, I think so. Done it before, more than once.
Updated: Article 16 less likely to be triggered as Lord Frost does NI tour “We all went in there thinking this is the precursor to pulling article 16 but he doubled down on wanting a deal.”
People who want it “entirely elected” don’t appear to know what its purpose is.
The first question needs to be, what is the HoL *for*, why is it there? Answer that question, then think about how it should be formed.
A better starting point would be - do we need a second chamber? If we do what should it do? And then after that starting working on it.
The current HoL is one where in theory expertise seats that stops stupid things being implemented by delaying them but is that enough or even a reason for its existence?
Is there any country which operates with only one house? (without a seperate head of state which actually has power ie a President?_
Mr. Sandpit, the Government twice tried to bring in vaccine passports but thankfully were headed off. Don't believe in an instinct for liberty that isn't there.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
I feel for @Leon. The poor guy is stalked by the pathetic Sean Thomas Knox, be it overseas flint knapping engagements, or in this case, a trip to see a well liked folk musician. Maybe he should contact the police?
I've actually never heard of Sean Thomas Knox apart from on here. Odd one.
"House prices soared to a record high in the final month of the stamp duty holiday after the average property gained £7,000 in the space of one month."
My grandson and his father had a positive test on monday and today my daughter has succumbed though their daughter in Leeds University has tested negative
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
Indeed and we are now at the stage of "living with" the virus in terms of having (for the most part) reduced its personal impact via vaccinations. Were we still absent a vaccine, I'd argue we'd be staring at a new round of restrictions but we aren't and that's entirely (I would argue) down to the vaccines.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
My wife and I received our flu vaccines last week following our boosters the week before
I'm having the both in one go tomorrow. Can I cope with 2 pricks at the same time? Yes, I think so. Done it before, more than once.
On going outdoors, I saw Suede a week or so ago. Brett Anderson's preening narcissism and arrogant showmanship was the perfect end to COVID. He was as high as a kite.
FREDERIKSBERG has a social democrat mayor - perhaps only Nick Palmer will appreciate what a shock this is and shows how demographic change is sending the Copenhagen area redder than ever - his old chums in Enhedslisten (lightweight communists with ponytails) also THRASHED the social democrats in Copenhagen - the "mink scandal" hit the social democrats very hard and they had their worst night in decades and the Konservative had their best night
Looking at the overall national numbers, however, the "Red" bloc has still polled 49%
On going outdoors, I saw Suede a week or so ago. Brett Anderson's preening narcissism and arrogant showmanship was the perfect end to COVID. He was as high as a kite.
“Last year the U.S. divorce rate hit a 50-year low. Teen pregnancies are at the lowest rate seen since they began to be systematically tracked in the 1930s, and the rate continues to plummet: In 2018, the teen-pregnancy rate was half of what it was in 2008. Even the rate of out-of-wedlock births, which had been climbing steadily since the 1950s, peaked around 2008 and has been declining modestly since—from 52 births per 1,000 unmarried women that year to 40 in 2019.”
Sounds good. But why is it happening?
“The bad news is that rates of more positive behaviors are declining too. Most notably, both marriage rates and fertility rates are at all-time lows in the United States. Total fertility in our country is now about 1.7 births per woman, well below the population-replacement rate. Younger Americans are having trouble pairing off—so that not only teen sex but also teen dating have dipped dramatically. “
“There are fewer abortions because there are fewer pregnancies, and so more of those that happen are wanted. There are fewer out-of-wedlock births because there are fewer births in general. The same pattern is evident beyond sexuality and family too. Fewer teenagers are dying in car accidents because fewer teenagers are getting driver’s licenses. There is less social disorder, we might say, because there is less social life. We are doing less of everything together, so that what we do is a little more tidy and controlled.”
Yes. Smart phones and the internet are killing human society
Plus young people are much more risk averse. Cautious. Nervous. From sex to booze to the way they speak. They are scared
Of course I make these comments by typing on my smartphone. Which I have been scrolling for 2 hours, this morning
But, fuck, it's a blessing. Living out here in the sticks 40 years ago I'd have looked forward to the Spectator coming once a week, and driven into Plymouth every so often to see if there was anything readable at Waterstones. And become severely alcoholic out of complete and utter boredom.
Yes the Net is great for older people. Paradoxically less so for the young
Btw thanks for your advice to go out and see Seth Lakeman live, last night. He was brilliant. A truly rousing gig. Some beautiful musicianship. But also alpha showmanship. He’s like the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor
I like that label very much!
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
So good that it's already been picked up by that tweeter entirely unconnected to Leon, @thomasknox
@thomasknox 12m Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
I feel for @Leon. The poor guy is stalked by the pathetic Sean Thomas Knox, be it overseas flint knapping engagements, or in this case, a trip to see a well liked folk musician. Maybe he should contact the police?
I actually think I saw this unsavoury character “seanT” in the audience at the gig. However, being a squillionaire thriller writer type he was in the front row, as you can see from his photos. Us artisans were crammed in the back.
Comments
The people on the beaches at Calais are a small sub-group of asylum seekers/immigrants.
On names, I have a complicated name which hardly anyone ever gets right. Same for both my parents. I have never been called by the first name on my birth certificate but this seems to follow a family tradition. All my Irish aunties had lovely names but when we were doing a family tree a few years back we discovered that their given names were very different and that my grandparents had simply recycled the same two names using them alternately.
Kevin on the other hand is a lovely name in Ireland and Brittany. It is the name of an Irish saint and, over there, does not have the same connotations that the snobby English have assigned to it.
Finally, on politics, I do think that the decision to scrap the rail improvements in the North - a manifesto commitment - is going to hit the Tories much harder than sleaze and will not do much for Sunak's chances. Typical "penny wise, pound foolish" policies from the Tories coupled with a broken promise. A bad move.
Maybe key bit we are overlooking, did we really help the Kurd’s after they bore brunt of fighting for us against ISIS? Or is lots of Kurds now pawns in Baltic woods or giving all their savings to gangsters to risk it in the channel, seeking to live somewhere safe they can build a life again
Could we have done more to help refugee Kurds live where they came from, and made it better for everyone except gangsters and other bad friends of Putin?
@JohnRentoul
·
47m
Want to feel old? This is the question
@tylercowen has to answer now: “Why is inflation so bad?”
What is not absurd is marrying people in church who have a past and lots of baggage. This is pretty universal and is called the human condition. The church exists to forgive and help people move on.
Boris has many faults, and so does the church. What is never a fault is people seeking and the church offering forgiveness.
At each stop along their migration they are related with (at minimum) hostility by the local people.
The hatred directed at them in the Calais is visceral and very open.
The refugees believe (and are encouraged to believe by the people smugglers) that It's All Better In Britain.
The vast majority of refugees do not reach the rich western countries. They live in vast refugee camps and dire poverty in the countries neighbouring the one they have been forced to flee. Given the conditions, none of them will have been motivated by economic considerations. So I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of refugees are exactly that.
Those refugees who do not stay in refugee camps are clearly motivated by improving their standard of living, given that they will not be in fear of Assad when in Turkey, or of the Myanmar military when in Bangladesh. So the vast majority of refugees who reach Britain will be motivated by economic considerations.
If we cannot make it safe for refugees to return home then we should be taking a fair share.
The fact that I can remember well the days when a pint in a pub cost 14p makes me feel a bit wistful. In those far off days the fact that it had once been 2d a pint made no impression.
I simply think that the 100% refugee is a rarity. much like the 10%% economic migrant. People do things for multiple reasons. Which is why asylum decisions are complex, rather than a rubber stamp.
From that it follows that having some economic reasons for immigration does not invalidate other asylum qualifying reasons.
Got a wife and kids in Cadover Bridge ...
Our greatest issue here is that are immigration services are far too slow, a lot of money needs to be thrown at the issue to speed things out and actually ship failed migrants home.
The biggest difference, though, appears to be in attitudes. Germany is in full panic mode ahead of tomorrow's meeting of federal and state leaders. After celebrating "Freedom Day" in July, the UK appears broadly to have accepted the costs that accompany its liberty.
https://twitter.com/tom_nuttall/status/1460920274145234950?s=20
Repentance and forgiveness are meant to involve some hard self-analysis and a change of behaviour not be the equivalent of a group hug to make you feel better.
Boris's marriage in church stinks because of the Church's utter hypocrisy. There is little evidence of Boris ever having attempted to be a good Catholic. He is a twice divorced man. And yet Catholics who have tried to do their best but are divorced are denied what he so freely got. And don't talk to me about its attitude to gay Catholics. Grrrrr..... 🤬
The meeting was interrupted by the noise from next door - some French policemen were giving an immigrant a "passage à tabac" - the preliminary tune up before being questioned.
The chap she was meeting seemed to regard this as perfectly normal. And this was in the early 2000s....
This silent prayer...
I surmise that their Cartesian thinking makes them place people into buckets…
Peak Pandemic, there
@thomasknox
12m
Wonderful gig by Seth Lakeman and band, at the Union Chapel, Islington, London (an equally wondrous venue) courtesy of @timcummingartist Lakeman is the Bruce Springsteen of Dartmoor; the Boss of Two Bridges. And London is BACK
I would not be surprised to see most of Europe in lockdown for Christmas. I can't see it happening here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf5Dwy11uQ4
Note: this is information, not a tip. I've not bothered to think about it. As William Kedjanyi notes, Starmer is surrounded by better media performers than him.
If you just convert to God rather than to Christ you could be Muslim or Jewish not just Christian.
Ever since Adam and Eve humanity has largely been responsible for its own condition on earth rather than God
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?time=2021-09-20..latest&facet=none&uniformYAxis=0&Metric=Tests&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Align+outbreaks=false&country=ITA~DEU~GBR~FRA~BEL~NLD~ESP~AUS~NZL~PRT~DNK~POL~IRL~AUT
We have generally done a lot of testing, with over 1% of the population testing every day. If you think that is a lot then right now in Austria they are testing almost 5% of the population daily which must be a major factor in the number of cases they have. In Denmark it is over 2% of the population.
They are the outliers though, other selected countries test this % of the population daily:
- Spain: 0.15%
- Germany: 0.2%
- France: 0.4%
It becomes interesting when you look at share of positive cases:
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?time=2021-09-20..latest&facet=none&uniformYAxis=0&Metric=Share+of+positive+tests&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Align+outbreaks=false&country=ITA~DEU~GBR~FRA~BEL~NLD~ESP~AUS~NZL~PRT~DNK~POL~IRL~AUT
Austria is only 2.6% positive compared to our 4.4%. Austria only have so many cases due to their massive testing regime. Whereas their near-neighbours in Germany have 16% positive. Clearly the number of reported cases in Germany is a massive under-estimate which explains now why they are seeing higher death rates.
Seth Lakeman's tour in December has support from Winter Mountain who are really good...
First you have to get out of your hellhole country. Then you need the cash and nous to get into the EU across some sea or border. Then you have to traverse all of Europe, evading hassle, camp out in Calais for weeks. And then you have to cross one of the busiest sea lanes in the world
To do all that without dying or giving up you have to be strong, smart and bloody determined. Probably an ideal immigrant. Young and ambitious. Unlikely to immediately turn to a lazy life of crime, more likely to start a business and make money
I think we should encourage more Channel crossings, but maybe make them a bit harder. Like in Squid Game.
Rachael Venables
@rachaelvenables
· 35m
BREAKING: Nine Insulate Britain activists are being jailed immediately for breach of an Injunction, barring them from protesting on the M25. Most are getting four months in prison. Ben Taylor gets six months for telling the Judge he would block the motorway again. @LBC
Prof. Christina Pagel
@chrischirp
Quick European comparison on what has happened since 1 July 2021.
The UK has the highest overall number of cases (per population) - far higher than most of western Europe.
https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1460634245668474881
===
Her graph can be read two ways though. One way is that we got a nice exit wave out of the way in summer and mainly the young and now we enter winter in a far better shape than rest of europe.
Did you ever wonder why John Barnes got the nickname "Digger"?
Was it really just because there happened to be a (old white man) character in Dallas called Digger Barnes?
How many times can London be back?
Should it be:
Abolished 22%
Entirely elected 30%
Partly elected 15%
Entirely appointed 9%
DK 25%
https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1460930969062543361?s=20
Hmmm....
They do feel quite rough with lots of coughing and are self isolating until 26 November
However, I would argue case rates may well be higher but the vaccines are mitigating the effects to a bad cold/ cough that is not resulting in increasing hospitalisations and deaths, specifically because of that success with not only the vaccines but also the boosters
A day off and a confession from your old pal Mr Stodge - forty years ago, I was living In Denmark and while my Danish experience isn't that of @NickPalmer and especially @kingbongo, I was at the Odder Hojskole (Folk HIgh School literally) for two terms.
I went back a couple of times after and I can probably hold my own in a Danish conversation even now.
Last evening's Danish local elections piqued my interest in political events in the Odder Kommune (Council). When I was there, the Forstander (Head Teacher) of the Hojskole was the Deputy Mayor and he went on to become the full Mayor (Borgmester) a few years later. The Mayoralty was exchanged between the Venstre and Social Democrats but it's been held by Venstre since 2014.
https://ugeavisen.dk/odderavis/artikel/liveblog-fra-valgaftenen-i-odder-følg-med-i-resultaterne-efterhånden-som-de-tikker-ind
Despite being clear top of the poll, Uffe Jensen, who had been the mayor since 2014, is out because the governing Conservative-Venstre-Folkeparti coalition lost its majority as one Folkeparti seat went to the Radikale Venstre.
The split is now 10-9 to the "red" grouping of Social Democrats (5), Radical Venstre (2), Enhedslisten (2) and Socialist Folkeparti (1). They outvote Venstre (7) and the Conservatives (2).
The live blog follows all the typical excitement of a night at a local election count when control switches from one party/group/bloc to another.
People who want it “entirely elected” don’t appear to know what its purpose is.
The context is that we have spread our cases out fairly evenly over that time period, building immunity through infection and not overwhelming health services. Whereas other countries are getting a huge spike now with cases in a much shorter time frame which risks causing issues with healthcare and could end up in lockdowns.
I think its hilarious we are still replacing the 'temporary' hereditary peers from the 90s.
Those who get ill and require hospitalisation are largely the unvaccinated and while I accept those with weakened immune systems and other health problems need to continue to exercise caution, for the majority of the vaccinated (and especially those triply dosed), life can carry on much as normal.
The priority must be to continue to vaccinate - whether first, second or third doses. Every vaccination helps no matter where it sits in the order.
The next stage will then be to continue to observe efficacy levels of the third vaccine - initial results are very good but the longevity of such levels of immunity remains to be seen and while it would be helpful if we could go a year before the fourth vaccination, the possibility must be we will need a further round of boosters in the spring but we'll see.
The other aspect is getting normal flu vaccinations done - for all coronavirus grabs the headlines, influenza hasn't gone away and can be just as serious.
And before someone tries, no, you can't just standardise the testing/cases with a bit of multiplication.
The current HoL is one where in theory expertise seats that stops stupid things being implemented by delaying them but is that enough or even a reason for its existence?
Here's a graph for all 35 countries with > 1M population Thread, 1/
Blue is the 7-day mean outdoor temperature.
White is the 7-day case ratio (i.e. new cases detected on a given date, divided by new cases detected 7 days earlier). This ratio can also be used as a rough estimation of R (i.e. the number of persons infected by a single case).
https://twitter.com/flight_behav/status/1460718654383960068?s=20
Interesting - also "spot the liars"
Thankfully for the UK, the combination of a great job on vaccine procurement, very high take-up rates of vaccination, and a government who are naturally minded to be against restrictions, have meant that life should be pretty much normal over the winter. The success of the vaccines in keeping people out of hospital, should mean there’s a low chance of the health service being more overwhelmed than usual over the colder months.
https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2021/11/how-the-uk-sleepwalked-into-another-covid-disaster
The article is entirely predicated on the basis that we should have as few cases as possible when kids went back to school. He seems to have completely missed the fact that we have been living our lives as normal and building up a good level of immunity. He also seems to have had this article published just as countries who did what he wanted are having massive Covid spikes which risk overwhelming their health systems and going into lockdown.
I'm not sure that anyone wants that debate, though, since it's easier just to rail against the current, fairly indefensible system.
The present arrangement is an awkward compromise which suits whoever happens to be in government, which is why it persists. Even if it's not entirely without utility.
Now, the speed at which cases in the Netherlands went through the roof really spooked the government. And hospitalisations are a lagging indicator. But if the hospitalisation number remains in that 150 to 200 a day range, then it's really quite manageable for them.
HS2 and 3 and the betrayal of the North completely irrelevant; Brexit overwhelmingly popular; employment and business in a healthy state; sleaze likely to be written off as "they're all at it"; Labour viewed with scorn as effete metropolitan woke remainers. And of course a widely popular former MP who died tragically, not someone who resigned as a result of corruption allegations.
Other than that the only thing that could have gone differently would have been a 4 - 5 month window for booster shots not 6 months, but that really is a pedantic point more than anything else.
The truth is that since March 2020 the only solution to Covid is via herd immunity and praying that it doesn't mutate into something else while we get there.
“We all went in there thinking this is the precursor to pulling article 16 but he doubled down on wanting a deal.”
https://twitter.com/lisaocarroll/status/1460928046299557892?s=20
Edit: nevermind- answered my own question:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicameralism
Telegraph
https://twitter.com/Nassreddin2002/status/1460870741193338887/photo/1
Losses for the Social Democrats have been off set by gains for Enhedslisten, Radikale Venstre and Socialistiske Folkeparti.
On the "blue" side, nowhere near as bad for Venstre and strong progress for the Conservatives but off set by further big losses for Dansk Folkeparti.
I do not repine