Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

All I want for Christmas is new (platforms to bet on) – politicalbetting.com

2

Comments

  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Germany isn't exactly a model of Covid success these days though (see other post). I guess the UK believes that in the long run the 'crackdown' measures just increase resistance and can actually be counterproductive.

    And frankly, if the new line on restrictions is that it is because fully vaxxed, even boosted, people are being forced to self-isolate, rather than because hospitals are full to the brim of unvaxxed people, then it wouldn't actually help either way. Even if it might be a politically popular way to give the impression of doing something as an alternative.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,835
    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
  • alex_ said:

    I've not been monitoring for the last couple of days. Can someone explain why we're suddenly talking about lockdown again.

    Partly I think the difference is that PB is almost as bipolar as Leon - we are always either whooping or despairing, and "Hmm, what comes next?" is usually the right line to take with Covid. The issue is that so many services are struggling with massive sick leave, so although fears of a big death toll have receded, there are concerns that the NHS, care homes and perhaps other vital services could be seriously impaired.

    I tend to the "Johnson gives stern advice" scenario, with the ignored lockdown recommendations waved at backbenchers to show what a resolute chap he is. If people being on sick leave gets worse and worse, he then locks down on Jan 2, having shown that he wasn't doing it lightly. I think people would cut him some slack at that point.

    Which fits with the pattern of doing everything a bit too late, but also, in fairness, the pattern of doing it in the end if necessary.
    Telling the country - which by then will have over 35m triple vaccinated - that they're going to have more restrictions not because they're at risk but because some asymptomatic people might be on sick leave is not going to be accepted.
    When the Government has the power to legally mandate businesses to abide by whatever imposition is placed on them, does that matter? This has always been the major weakness in the "people will not comply" argument. People may not comply, and break whatever 'rules' they can but you can't break a rule about not entering a pub if the pub isn't open. Meanwhile the polling just continues to show the popularity of restrictions on other people.
    And if everyone wants restrictions on other people but ignores restrictions on themselves ?

    As to closing down sectors of the economy it costs more and more money - money which cannot then be used to buy votes and/or has to be raised by increased taxation.

    And with each closure there are people negatively affected who become less and less supportive of the government.

    Especially as the reasons to justify such restrictions become more and more spurious.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    Interesting. AFAICS the vaxxer refusers are so diverse that any political fraction will find victims to cry about, from the extreme lefties to the right wing libertarians. And if one defends, say, the Lawrence Foxes and Neil Olivers, then one can't very well turn round and say this or that other category (of leftie vegans or whatever) deserves to be frogmarched to the inoculation centres.

    And the UK has had compulsory vaccination before both de lege and de facto (in schools and, for conscripts, the armed forces). So there is no lack of precedent.
  • glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    FF43 said:

    Long dark nights, cold and miserable days and yet another Covid wave. Tempted to hibernate and wake up in March, when hopefully it's all over.

    But in the meantime we have Christmas to celebrate and a life to live...

    So wishing PBers one and all a happy Christmas and a healthy New Year when it comes.

    Indeed.

    Interesting test of real public opinion, decisions on New Year by the way. One of those things that a hell of a lot of people seem to feel compelled to celebrate, but polling suggests many (including among those who see it through) would rather be tucked up by 10 in bed. One of those cases where strong government guidance (as opposed to legal restrictions) has IMO a seriously good chance of success.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Because they spent the money upfront, by which time it was too late to back out so they had to make use of them. I think one can explain a hell of a lot of Government action using sunk cost fallacies. Similar things may well materialise in future with vaccines. The amount that the Government appears to have bought up, now and into the future, is going to be a strong driver for ongoing regular booster programmes regardless of whether they are actually justified.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    edited December 2021
    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    alex_ said:

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Because they spent the money upfront, by which time it was too late to back out so they had to make use of them. I think one can explain a hell of a lot of Government action using sunk cost fallacies. Similar things may well materialise in future with vaccines. The amount that the Government appears to have bought up, now and into the future, is going to be a strong driver for ongoing regular booster programmes regardless of whether they are actually justified.
    alex_ said:

    FF43 said:

    Long dark nights, cold and miserable days and yet another Covid wave. Tempted to hibernate and wake up in March, when hopefully it's all over.

    But in the meantime we have Christmas to celebrate and a life to live...

    So wishing PBers one and all a happy Christmas and a healthy New Year when it comes.

    Indeed.

    Interesting test of real public opinion, decisions on New Year by the way. One of those things that a hell of a lot of people seem to feel compelled to celebrate, but polling suggests many (including among those who see it through) would rather be tucked up by 10 in bed. One of those cases where strong government guidance (as opposed to legal restrictions) has IMO a seriously good chance of success.
    Both very interesting comments.
  • Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    The anti-vaxxers are the useful idiots of authoritarian zero-covidiots, libertarian nutters and NHS worshippers.

    I doubt there can be many anti-vaxxers remaining who haven't yet been infected - though I've thought that for a while.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386
    edited December 2021
    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    Interesting. AFAICS the vaxxer refusers are so diverse that any political fraction will find victims to cry about, from the extreme lefties to the right wing libertarians. And if one defends, say, the Lawrence Foxes and Neil Olivers, then one can't very well turn round and say this or that other category (of leftie vegans or whatever) deserves to be frogmarched to the inoculation centres.

    And the UK has had compulsory vaccination before both de lege and de facto (in schools and, for conscripts, the armed forces). So there is no lack of precedent.
    The Vax refusers are also a noisy but small minority in each group anyways.
    Most fringe libertarians aren't anti-vax.
    I mentioned yesterday that as a Buddhist, I probably know more vegans than most. Don't know a single one who has openly stated they won't get vaccinated. Dura ace is an odd exception.
    Not sure a crackdown would be as politically fraught as commonly thought. We've cracked down on far more popular and widespread public health hazards in the past.
    Seat belts, drink driving and indoor smoking spring to mind.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    My final gift to you, my loyal followers. It's Alistair's Official South Africa Projection

    Week 51 Admissions (prediciton): 8675 (+3%)
    Week 51 Deaths (prediction): 612 (+49%)

    For Comparison previous Increases have been
    Admissions: +91%, +230%(!), +111%, +16%
    Deaths -23%, +82%, +131%, +86%

    Currently Ventilated: 2.7%
    Currently Oxygenated: 15.7%
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,922

    I've opened a bottle of Exeter Brewery Avocet Organic Ale.

    Light and refreshing. Nice.

    Started Christmas early with a bottle of Five Kingdoms Heart of Darkness - Dark Storm 6.9% ABV stout aged in whisky casks, Just the job for a cold evening.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,039
    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Sweden has a new Government and is moving in the direction of lockdowns. Russia being "libertarian" is one interpretation i suppose!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    Not to mention the lack of workers in key sectors in the first place.
  • Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
  • alex_ said:

    One interesting political dynamic upcoming is the vaccine mandate in the NHS. At the moment you get a lot of anecdotal stories in the press about the irresponsible unvaccinated clogging up hospitals and putting NHS staff on the frontline under intolerable stress.

    But then whenever you get the vaccine mandate story raised you get somewhat more nuanced views often about how this is all the fault of the Govt for exacerbating pressure on the NHS by sacking a significant chunk of its workforce. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out in the public perception and media.

    Ah f**k it! Let us give the anti-vaxxers a simple choice - vaccine or a firing squad.

    Time for the next bottle and I will see you all after Xmas if OGH does not wield the BanHammer on me for this post. In vino veritas.

    Toodle-pip :+1:
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386
    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,846

    I've opened a bottle of Exeter Brewery Avocet Organic Ale.

    Light and refreshing. Nice.

    Started Christmas early with a bottle of Five Kingdoms Heart of Darkness - Dark Storm 6.9% ABV stout aged in whisky casks, Just the job for a cold evening.
    A bottle of Bavarian nuss likor is going down well after dinner, here.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    jonny83 said:

    alex_ said:

    One interesting political dynamic upcoming is the vaccine mandate in the NHS. At the moment you get a lot of anecdotal stories in the press about the irresponsible unvaccinated clogging up hospitals and putting NHS staff on the frontline under intolerable stress.

    But then whenever you get the vaccine mandate story raised you get somewhat more nuanced views often about how this is all the fault of the Govt for exacerbating pressure on the NHS by sacking a significant chunk of its workforce. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out in the public perception and media.

    Out of interest, with boosters and all that how does the NHS vaccine mandate actually manifest itself in regulation? i.e. if you are totally unvaccinated "today", do they basically mandate a date by which you need to have had three jabs? Or is it just two?
    It's just the two jabs for now that are required.

    Yes, they have a deadline of the 1st of April 2022 unless they are medically exempt or work in an area that does not come into 'direct face to face contact with service users'.

    We have also told our staff for them to meet the two dose deadline in April they will need to have their first dose done by the 3rd February so it will give them time to get their 2nd.
    Are you able to indicate what level of resistance you are seeing?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
    LFTs are in the figures until replaced subsequently by PCR result. It appeared with Delta there were a reasonable percentage of false positives - such that 'case' numbers on a specific day would sometime reduce after 3-4 days. I'm not sure whether the same pattern is observed with omicron. Anecdotal experience would suggest that LFTs are very poor at picking up pre-symptomatic and definitely pre-infectious cases, but once you've got the dreaded double line the PCR is nailed on.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    alex_ said:

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
    LFTs are in the figures until replaced subsequently by PCR result. It appeared with Delta there were a reasonable percentage of false positives - such that 'case' numbers on a specific day would sometime reduce after 3-4 days. I'm not sure whether the same pattern is observed with omicron. Anecdotal experience would suggest that LFTs are very poor at picking up pre-symptomatic and definitely pre-infectious cases, but once you've got the dreaded double line the PCR is nailed on.
    Thanks, makes sense.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,806
    My experience so far at Christmas is that people's tolerance for restrictions is waning. Struck by that in my own family. Unlessential omicron can be made more threatening I don't think it will wash.
  • dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
    Russia is NOT FREE according to Freedom House.

    https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2021
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,846
    These Chris Whitty ads on TV.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edited December 2021

    alex_ said:

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
    LFTs are in the figures until replaced subsequently by PCR result. It appeared with Delta there were a reasonable percentage of false positives - such that 'case' numbers on a specific day would sometime reduce after 3-4 days. I'm not sure whether the same pattern is observed with omicron. Anecdotal experience would suggest that LFTs are very poor at picking up pre-symptomatic and definitely pre-infectious cases, but once you've got the dreaded double line the PCR is nailed on.
    Thanks, makes sense.
    I could be completely wrong about the "false positive" line though. Possibly the replacement of one with the other just pushed specimen date for the positive result a couple of days into the future.
  • glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
    I think either count but a PCR is often used to confirm a LFT.

    They're not double counted.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    dixiedean said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    Not to mention the lack of workers in key sectors in the first place.
    If the US is anything to go by, the actual loss of workers will be a fart in a thunder storm.

    The problem at the moment is that the Guardian et al can't frame the story right:

    "Tory government firing Black nurses" - that's got snap, it's a got a beat to it, the progressive can dance to that...

    But the "why" is all wrong. Because vaccine refusal = being a Trumpet, in much of ProgWorld.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Lol Libertarian Russia: Falsified numbers, crap vaccine, low take-up, massive excess deaths, and all led by a dictator.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,039
    edited December 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    I accuse you of breaking Leon's 2nd Law of Covid HUBRIS, and I hereby sentence you to a doubling rate of 2.2 days

    "Tim White
    @TWMCLtd
    5h
    #UAE's growth in new #Covid19 cases today is 478%

    1,352 more infections diagnosed. One death.
    Doubling time is now 2.2 days in the Emirates"

    https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1474401606598893571?s=20

  • sladeslade Posts: 2,029
    My niece just phoned to say she has been pinged ( I am due to have Christmas dinner with her and her family). We've decided to go ahead anyway. Wish me luck. So Merry Christmas to all.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    slade said:

    My niece just phoned to say she has been pinged ( I am due to have Christmas dinner with her and her family). We've decided to go ahead anyway. Wish me luck. So Merry Christmas to all.

    She'll do a LFT right? If that's negative, she's free to have lunch with you AIUI.
  • jonny83jonny83 Posts: 1,270
    edited December 2021

    jonny83 said:

    alex_ said:

    One interesting political dynamic upcoming is the vaccine mandate in the NHS. At the moment you get a lot of anecdotal stories in the press about the irresponsible unvaccinated clogging up hospitals and putting NHS staff on the frontline under intolerable stress.

    But then whenever you get the vaccine mandate story raised you get somewhat more nuanced views often about how this is all the fault of the Govt for exacerbating pressure on the NHS by sacking a significant chunk of its workforce. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out in the public perception and media.

    Out of interest, with boosters and all that how does the NHS vaccine mandate actually manifest itself in regulation? i.e. if you are totally unvaccinated "today", do they basically mandate a date by which you need to have had three jabs? Or is it just two?
    It's just the two jabs for now that are required.

    Yes, they have a deadline of the 1st of April 2022 unless they are medically exempt or work in an area that does not come into 'direct face to face contact with service users'.

    We have also told our staff for them to meet the two dose deadline in April they will need to have their first dose done by the 3rd February so it will give them time to get their 2nd.
    Are you able to indicate what level of resistance you are seeing?
    Quite a bit already actually and I can only see it getting worse as we get closer to April.

    What we have done is sent them a word document/declaration form to complete with tickboxes and text fields for example date of 1st and 2nd vacc (so if they have had their jabs elsewhere they can let us know) a section on bookings so they can let us know they have booked either of their jabs and are in progress to get immunised. There is also a declined vaccination section, and a medically exempt section so they can let us know and at some point we will contact them to discuss. They have to sign the form also before returning.

    We received a few emails this week from staff members refusing to complete and send back to us their form as they want to speak to solicitors or go to their Union over it.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    edited December 2021
    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    Sounds like she should have spoken to @Dura_Ace - that way you would be assembling 1,458 pieces of actual 911

    How many other people had mates in their early 20s who were alway trying to rebuild wrecks - usually 1960s sports cars? One friend had a Triumph Spitfire, as a pile of bits for years. He got as far as reworking the engine to a gleaming showroom quality....
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
    Russia is NOT FREE according to Freedom House.

    https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2021
    No shit Sherlock!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    Interesting. AFAICS the vaxxer refusers are so diverse that any political fraction will find victims to cry about, from the extreme lefties to the right wing libertarians. And if one defends, say, the Lawrence Foxes and Neil Olivers, then one can't very well turn round and say this or that other category (of leftie vegans or whatever) deserves to be frogmarched to the inoculation centres.

    And the UK has had compulsory vaccination before both de lege and de facto (in schools and, for conscripts, the armed forces). So there is no lack of precedent.
    The Vax refusers are also a noisy but small minority in each group anyways.
    Most fringe libertarians aren't anti-vax.
    I mentioned yesterday that as a Buddhist, I probably know more vegans than most. Don't know a single one who has openly stated they won't get vaccinated. Dura ace is an odd exception.
    Not sure a crackdown would be as politically fraught as commonly thought. We've cracked down on far more popular and widespread public health hazards in the past.
    Seat belts, drink driving and indoor smoking spring to mind.
    Good sensible coimments, thanks.

    This reminds me of when the Scottish Gmt banned smoking in pubs and other enclosed public places in 2006 (Lab-LD ogvernment accepting a SNP initiative); there was huge howling and the Tories opposed it. The then First Minister is quoted:

    'McConnell said the night before the ban was a sleepless one for him: “We had been told by the lobbyists and the campaigners for two years that there would be fighting in the streets, and there would be mass arrests and the police couldn’t cope with it and that we were destroying the fabric of our communities.”'

    https://www.holyrood.com/inside-politics/view,15-years-off-the-fags-the-story-of-scotlands-smoking-ban
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,509
    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    I accuse you of breaking Leon's 2nd Law of Covid HUBRIS, and I hereby sentence you to a doubling rate of 2.2 days

    "Tim White
    @TWMCLtd
    5h
    #UAE's growth in new #Covid19 cases today is 478%

    1,352 more infections diagnosed. One death.
    Doubling time is now 2.2 days in the Emirates"

    https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1474401606598893571?s=20

    Yes, the case numbers have been rising exponentially here in recent days. What is the 478% number though?

    Today’s 1,352 cases come from 361,000 PCR tests in a population of 10m people. Yes, 3.5% of the population did a PCR test yesterday.
    The UK equivalent would be 10,000 cases from 2.3m tests. The UK actual is 120k cases.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    Yeah, given your wonderful charts and absence of R suddenly going sub 1 I have been a bit surprised by the confidence of the people who thought London had peaked back on the 15th.

    You raise a very interesting point about "the regions". It is pretty clear now in SA that the other Provinces have not followed Gauteng's growth pattern, they are all shorter and weaker. Given Gauteng is a quarter of the population but half the admissions I was expecting the rest of SA to still have a significant surge left in them but they seem to be topping out.

    I wonder if there is a combination effect that made London a perfect storm - big January wave, lower vax rates, large pool of only-infection the benefits of which would be wearing off considerably by now.

    So it raises the very real hope they we are almost past the worse when it comes to cases.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    edited December 2021

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    Sounds like she should have spoken to @Dura_Ace - that way you would be assembling 1,458 pieces of actual 911

    How many other people had mates in their early 20s who were alway trying to rebuild wrecks - usually 1960s sports cars? One friend had a Triumph Spitfire, as a pile of bits for years. He got as far as reworking the engine to a gleaming showroom quality....
    Me too, around 1980-5 or so (ie my friends did it, not me). One had a kit car, rather; but it was so low ... I remmeber the expression in his face when he left a driveway and the kerb was just a whisker too high ...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Okay, actually my last Christmas gift for you.

    Beware anyone who talks about Covid with this kind of confidence:


  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,039
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    I accuse you of breaking Leon's 2nd Law of Covid HUBRIS, and I hereby sentence you to a doubling rate of 2.2 days

    "Tim White
    @TWMCLtd
    5h
    #UAE's growth in new #Covid19 cases today is 478%

    1,352 more infections diagnosed. One death.
    Doubling time is now 2.2 days in the Emirates"

    https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1474401606598893571?s=20

    Yes, the case numbers have been rising exponentially here in recent days. What is the 478% number though?

    Today’s 1,352 cases come from 361,000 PCR tests in a population of 10m people. Yes, 3.5% of the population did a PCR test yesterday.
    The UK equivalent would be 10,000 cases from 2.3m tests. The UK actual is 120k cases.
    You're fucked. We're fucked. We're all fucked. Happy Fucking Christmas x
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,010

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
    Russia is NOT FREE according to Freedom House.

    https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2021
    No shit Sherlock!
    They're obviously right about Russia but their stance on, for instance, Britain's academic freedom seems pretty one-sided. They criticise:

    "In October 2020, Women and Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch commented that teaching critical race theory was partisan and illegal. That same month, the Department for Education issued guidance calling anticapitalism an “extreme political stance.”"

    while ignoring the pervasive non-platforming and even dismissal of academics with even moderately conservative views. Yet another woke pressure group?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    I accuse you of breaking Leon's 2nd Law of Covid HUBRIS, and I hereby sentence you to a doubling rate of 2.2 days

    "Tim White
    @TWMCLtd
    5h
    #UAE's growth in new #Covid19 cases today is 478%

    1,352 more infections diagnosed. One death.
    Doubling time is now 2.2 days in the Emirates"

    https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1474401606598893571?s=20

    Yes, the case numbers have been rising exponentially here in recent days. What is the 478% number though?

    Today’s 1,352 cases come from 361,000 PCR tests in a population of 10m people. Yes, 3.5% of the population did a PCR test yesterday.
    The UK equivalent would be 10,000 cases from 2.3m tests. The UK actual is 120k cases.
    You're fucked. We're fucked. We're all fucked. Happy Fucking Christmas x
    And happy Christmas to you and all other PBers.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,509

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    Sounds like she should have spoken to @Dura_Ace - that way you would be assembling 1,458 pieces of actual 911

    How many other people had mates in their early 20s who were alway trying to rebuild wrecks - usually 1960s sports cars? One friend had a Triumph Spitfire, as a pile of bits for years. He got as far as reworking the engine to a gleaming showroom quality....
    Ha. As a 21 year old, a family friend donated me a non-runner MGB, that I had to rebuild the engine. Was a great project as a young man, but sadly the engine turned out to be warped much more than expected, and it had a bad habit of eating head gaskets every few weeks until I could afford something else!

    It’s pretty awesome that LEGO are now making proper kits for adults though, those of us who grew up on the 1980s Technic stuff can now build rockets and cars, and it provides wives with an endless source of well-received presents.

    A real 911 doer-upper is on the bucket list, and hopefully soon. When we are all driving electric crap forced by governments, the market for classics is going sky high.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    edited December 2021
    Fishing said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
    Russia is NOT FREE according to Freedom House.

    https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2021
    No shit Sherlock!
    They're obviously right about Russia but their stance on, for instance, Britain's academic freedom seems pretty one-sided. They criticise:

    "In October 2020, Women and Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch commented that teaching critical race theory was partisan and illegal. That same month, the Department for Education issued guidance calling anticapitalism an “extreme political stance.”"

    while ignoring the pervasive non-platforming and even dismissal of academics with even moderately conservative views. Yet another woke pressure group?
    Surely a 'woke' pressure group would be showing the US and UK as not free? Or have I still not understood your term 'woke'?

    Actually, which academics have been dismissed for their moderately conservative views?
  • Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    I accuse you of breaking Leon's 2nd Law of Covid HUBRIS, and I hereby sentence you to a doubling rate of 2.2 days

    "Tim White
    @TWMCLtd
    5h
    #UAE's growth in new #Covid19 cases today is 478%

    1,352 more infections diagnosed. One death.
    Doubling time is now 2.2 days in the Emirates"

    https://twitter.com/TWMCLtd/status/1474401606598893571?s=20

    Yes, the case numbers have been rising exponentially here in recent days. What is the 478% number though?

    Today’s 1,352 cases come from 361,000 PCR tests in a population of 10m people. Yes, 3.5% of the population did a PCR test yesterday.
    The UK equivalent would be 10,000 cases from 2.3m tests. The UK actual is 120k cases.
    You're fucked. We're fucked. We're all fucked. Happy Fucking Christmas x
    "No, YOU'RE fucked! Confined to the infirmary. Quarantined. I think you'll be safe from any large nasty beasts while you're in there. Right? There's a good girl. Mr Aaron will escort you!"
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Re: the 3 scenario modelling including the “3 month” option.

    Regardless of what you think about reintroducing restrictions in general, is there anyone who doesn’t see this (if accurately reported) as an obviously transparent ploy to provide an extreme alternative to make other options look like moderate compromises? When the whole issue with Omicron is its speed of transmission and likelihood of ripping through the population at breakneck speed (even under the sort of “not really lockdown” “step 2” measures being proposed), thus causing huge workforce pressures as people are “forced” into self isolation, how does one arrive at a model where restrictions of that sort of length, and way past any peak in infections such that they would serve any purpose anyway?

    And if everyone does see it as an obviously transparent ploy, isn’t that likely to seriously p*ss off ministers and potentially have the opposite effect to that intended by hardening opposition to any measures at all? It seems certain that as hard data on transmission and severity seem to have both improved somewhat (assuming high & rapid transmissibility is bad)since the original modelling was produced, then questions will be asked as to how modelling on hospitalisation etc seems as bad as ever (caveated as usual for “the media only report the worst case scenarios”)
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,487
    Leon said:
    Making a joke of the whole thing would probably be the best approach, although I'm not sure that was what he was thinking of.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,723
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    Sounds like she should have spoken to @Dura_Ace - that way you would be assembling 1,458 pieces of actual 911

    How many other people had mates in their early 20s who were alway trying to rebuild wrecks - usually 1960s sports cars? One friend had a Triumph Spitfire, as a pile of bits for years. He got as far as reworking the engine to a gleaming showroom quality....
    Ha. As a 21 year old, a family friend donated me a non-runner MGB, that I had to rebuild the engine. Was a great project as a young man, but sadly the engine turned out to be warped much more than expected, and it had a bad habit of eating head gaskets every few weeks until I could afford something else!

    It’s pretty awesome that LEGO are now making proper kits for adults though, those of us who grew up on the 1980s Technic stuff can now build rockets and cars, and it provides wives with an endless source of well-received presents.

    A real 911 doer-upper is on the bucket list, and hopefully soon. When we are all driving electric crap forced by governments, the market for classics is going sky high.
    Some of us had to rely on the Lego available in the 1960s, which was nowhere near so sophisticated. Deprived childhood, trying to make rockets out of that lot.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Merry Christmas to all PBers, from a few timezones ahead of most of you!

    My wife bought me a Porsche 911 for Christmas! :D

    I’m going to be spending tomorrow assembling 1,458 pieces of LEGO.
    Sounds like she should have spoken to @Dura_Ace - that way you would be assembling 1,458 pieces of actual 911

    How many other people had mates in their early 20s who were alway trying to rebuild wrecks - usually 1960s sports cars? One friend had a Triumph Spitfire, as a pile of bits for years. He got as far as reworking the engine to a gleaming showroom quality....
    Ha. As a 21 year old, a family friend donated me a non-runner MGB, that I had to rebuild the engine. Was a great project as a young man, but sadly the engine turned out to be warped much more than expected, and it had a bad habit of eating head gaskets every few weeks until I could afford something else!

    It’s pretty awesome that LEGO are now making proper kits for adults though, those of us who grew up on the 1980s Technic stuff can now build rockets and cars, and it provides wives with an endless source of well-received presents.

    A real 911 doer-upper is on the bucket list, and hopefully soon. When we are all driving electric crap forced by governments, the market for classics is going sky high.
    A close relative, while doing research in Italy was lent a car by his Prof. Just to keep it running. Turned out to be an original, low serial number 911. With the famously suicidal handling. Cured him of any nostalgia for antique cars. Though it had some special "official" number plates - apparently the police would sometime salute when they saw them....
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,835

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    The anti-vaxxers are the useful idiots of authoritarian zero-covidiots, libertarian nutters and NHS worshippers.

    I doubt there can be many anti-vaxxers remaining who haven't yet been infected - though I've thought that for a while.
    There are millions, which is a very large pool of potential carriers. Of course, speaking in a broader sense, and with the proportion of the UK population apparently carrying antibodies to Covid somewhere in the ballpark of 95% IIRC, we have been wondering for some time when this wretched disease will subside simply due to it having a lack of sufficiently vulnerable victims. But that still hasn't happened, either.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386
    alex_ said:

    glw said:

    NeilVW said:

    France reported 94,124 daily COVID infections on Friday - a new daily record.

    The number of those being treated in hospital reached almost 16,200 - a seven-month high.

    That seems a really high number in hospital v cases relative to us - what would be the explanation?
    The UK does massively more testing.

    The 'envy of the world' does massively more whining.
    Just eyeballing worldometer the UK really does have a very large ratio of active cases to serious cases. Only a few countries like Norway, Switzerland, and Denmark are close.

    It most likely is down to far more asymptomatic and minor cases being picked up by the high level of testing we do. The only largish countries that have done more testing per capita are Denmark, UAE, and Austria. Looking at similar sized countries the UK has done roughly 2x more tests per capita that France, 2.5x Italy, 4x Spain, and nearly 6x Germany.
    And if you consider how much testing is currently being done those multiples will be even larger.

    The country would be better off if instead of this middle class idiocy of LFTs we trusted in vaccination.

    IIRC it was Cummings who had the idea of mass testing but it was then superseded by the vaccinations.

    Why its subsequently been allowed to become a reality I don't know.
    Dumb question: Is a reported positive LFT enough to count as a case - don't they have to be confirmed by a positive PCR?
    LFTs are in the figures until replaced subsequently by PCR result. It appeared with Delta there were a reasonable percentage of false positives - such that 'case' numbers on a specific day would sometime reduce after 3-4 days. I'm not sure whether the same pattern is observed with omicron. Anecdotal experience would suggest that LFTs are very poor at picking up pre-symptomatic and definitely pre-infectious cases, but once you've got the dreaded double line the PCR is nailed on.
    Friend in Germany had the LFT positive. And PCR came back.negative (both done by pharmacist not self). All the symptoms of Omicron.
    One anecdotal case, mind.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    Yeah, given your wonderful charts and absence of R suddenly going sub 1 I have been a bit surprised by the confidence of the people who thought London had peaked back on the 15th.

    You raise a very interesting point about "the regions". It is pretty clear now in SA that the other Provinces have not followed Gauteng's growth pattern, they are all shorter and weaker. Given Gauteng is a quarter of the population but half the admissions I was expecting the rest of SA to still have a significant surge left in them but they seem to be topping out.

    I wonder if there is a combination effect that made London a perfect storm - big January wave, lower vax rates, large pool of only-infection the benefits of which would be wearing off considerably by now.

    So it raises the very real hope they we are almost past the worse when it comes to cases.
    “We meet again, at the turn of the tide. A great storm is coming, but the tide has turned.”

    We shall see....

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,509
    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Yep. Case numbers are going up in countries that are doing a massive amount of testing - but what’s actually important is the follow-through in hospitalisations.

    If everyone’s getting positive tests, but not ending up in the hospital, then life is good irrespective of the case numbers.
  • Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    No because staff shortages through sickness and self-isolation also matter.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,835

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    All very sensible comments. However, it is voices on the Right I've mostly heard banging on against compulsion. And it isn't about how it affects minorities.
  • FT non-paywalled article musing on the decline of rock bands. It touches on football and politics, with the thesis that now the individual is bigger than the team, eg Boris and so on.
    https://www.ft.com/content/9727ce71-862b-4096-a530-4d5ae85faa07
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    The definition of Institutionally Racist specifically excludes intent. It is about outcomes.

    It is my understanding that some of the legal challenges regarding the NHS mandatory vaccinations relate to claims that the NHS hasn't done it's homework on "not disproportionately affecting minorities".
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,122
    alex_ said:

    Re: the 3 scenario modelling including the “3 month” option.

    Regardless of what you think about reintroducing restrictions in general, is there anyone who doesn’t see this (if accurately reported) as an obviously transparent ploy to provide an extreme alternative to make other options look like moderate compromises?

    It certainly *looks* a bit ropy, but I think it depends a lot on the numbers and on the context and explanations that I assume will go along with them.

    For instance the Warwick PDF specifically notes that length of restrictions doesn't change the peak value, which seems like a useful thing to know if your main concern is "are hospitals going to be in trouble", and that what makes a significant difference is not how long you go on for but whether you started early. That's stuff that you don't see clearly unless you take runs of the model for various stages from "stay as we are today" through to "long enough to clearly be longer than can possibly be necessary".

    There's certainly enough evidence in there to argue "if we are/were not prepared to slam the shutters down well before New Years there's not much gain in doing it at all and so we should have the courage of our convictions".
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,644
    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048

    FT non-paywalled article musing on the decline of rock bands. It touches on football and politics, with the thesis that now the individual is bigger than the team, eg Boris and so on.
    https://www.ft.com/content/9727ce71-862b-4096-a530-4d5ae85faa07

    Ah, so they are saying that egotistical front men for bands demanding it all be about them... is a new thing?!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,321
    edited December 2021
    Fishing said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Pessimist in me: the whole northern world will look at these case numbers, and rising hospital admissions and panic/react sensibly - and we will see a total lockdown from Canada to Korea, with a few libertarian outliers (Texas, Sweden, Russia)

    Optimist: Omicron is about to peak in London, if it hasn't already. London is not collapsing, the hospitals are not remotely overwhelmed. This will be repeated across the rich world. Omicron is a big old Meh


    I genuinely dunno which of these is more likely

    Russia is libertarian now?
    That's a generous interpretation of Vlad's regime to say the least.
    Russia is NOT FREE according to Freedom House.

    https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2021
    No shit Sherlock!
    They're obviously right about Russia but their stance on, for instance, Britain's academic freedom seems pretty one-sided. They criticise:

    "In October 2020, Women and Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch commented that teaching critical race theory was partisan and illegal. That same month, the Department for Education issued guidance calling anticapitalism an “extreme political stance.”"

    while ignoring the pervasive non-platforming and even dismissal of academics with even moderately conservative views. Yet another woke pressure group?
    That would be a fantastic bandwagon for Johnson to jump upon. A culture war with academics followed, by a ten point polling lead in seconds.
  • Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,702

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    WTF?
    To visit our website, you must be of legal age to drink alcohol in your country of residence. If no such laws exist in your country, you must be over 21.

    Are you of legal drinking age?
    yes no

  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,702
    edited December 2021
    Just popped in to say Happy Christmas whether you've been naughty or nice.
    Yours ever, Santa Claus
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,260

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,541

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    Belgian figure huge per head.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Fast in relative terms, but in overall numbers. Not yet

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    geoffw said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    WTF?
    To visit our website, you must be of legal age to drink alcohol in your country of residence. If no such laws exist in your country, you must be over 21.

    Are you of legal drinking age?
    yes no

    Legal guff, to make various countries happy.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,487
    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    Andy_JS said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
    Early days yet....
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,487
    edited December 2021

    Andy_JS said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
    Early days yet....
    Yes but I was replying to a comment which said "If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast." It's difficult for that to be correct if the figure for the whole UK is 366.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,037

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,487
    Happy Christmas to all PBers.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,386
    edited December 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
    Early days yet....
    Yes but I was replying to a comment which said "If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast." It's difficult for that to be correct if the figure for the whole UK is 366.
    So. Are they rising fast or not? It's difficult, as a non-specialist observer to keep up to date tbh.
    Particularly as a lot of commentary is a little partial. I'm a bit of an agnostic these days.
    366 seems a small number, yes.
    A couple of days ago there were many high fiving and declaring victory. Others are saying not so fast. I'm a little bewildered tbh
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,276
    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
    Early days yet....
    Yes but I was replying to a comment which said "If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast." It's difficult for that to be correct if the figure for the whole UK is 366.
    So. Are they rising fast or not? It's difficult, as a non-specialist observer to keep up to date tbh.
    Particularly as a lot of commentary is a little partial. I'm a bit of an agnostic these days.
    366 seems a small number, yes.
    A couple of days ago there were many high fiving and declaring victory. Others are saying not so fast. I'm a little bewildered tbh
    Yes. I've no idea what the threshold is between "London admissions are rising so fast that the hospitals will soon be swamped" and "London admissions are rising at a rate that means it would require an impossible number of people to be infected simultaneously to swamp the hospitals."

    When the government said they were keeping a close eye on the data it would have been nice if they'd given some indication of what sort of figures would be troubling and which would be good news.

    Merry Christmas to one and all. I baked my first Yule log for more than a decade for Christmas Eve, and now the wife is petitioning for an Imbolc log, and an Ostara log, and logs for Beltane, Litha, Lammas, Mabon and Samhain. So I guess that went well.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,048
    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    Pre '73 eh?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,037

    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    Pre '73 eh?
    They have released limited edition pints of Champagne a couple of times - I have a '95 one.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    edited December 2021
    Sandpit said:



    A real 911 doer-upper is on the bucket list, and hopefully soon. When we are all driving electric crap forced by governments, the market for classics is going sky high.

    Sadly there is no value in 911 projects any longer unless you have a warehouse full of parts already. Even 996s have gone to the moon after being slept on for years. 997s are not a bad option but they are complicated to work on. Even the stereo is controlled by CANBUS! I though about putting a standalone ECU in my 997 to offset the turbo vane geometry and other power chasing shenanigans but I soon realised I'd need a team of PhDs incarcerated in a Fritzl like arrangement in my house for months to get it working.

    My winter project this year is a 1980 Pontiac Firebird (injected 383 small block, 420hp, 6 speed manual ) which is very easy to work on and has incredible aftermarket support - you can buy literally anything for it. I just had to buy £5k worth of imperial sockets and spanners to do it. So my advice if you want a relatively painless introduction to the world of project cars is go USDM. Fuck yeah!

    Next year is a Boxster after I swore I'd never own one. I want to convert one to a central single seat for a track car.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,037
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    rcs1000 said:

    Earlier today there was discussion over why the French would remotely consider producing champagne in pint bottles for the UK…..

    Because we’re their biggest market?

    Bigger than the US.

    Not in per capita terms, but in absolute terms…..

    https://www.champagne.fr/en/champagne-economy/key-market-statistics

    I have a 58cl bottle of Pol Roger, so it's not like pints of champagne don't exist today.
    Pre '73 eh?
    They have released limited edition pints of Champagne a couple of times - I have a '95 one.
    It's the Cuvee Winston Churchill. You can almost certainly source one via BBR if you ask nicely.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,569
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Alistair said:

    My condolences to the "London has already peaked" thought line.

    London hasn't peaked.

    image

    However, the rate of increase is decreasing now, quite strongly

    image

    The decider is what happens in the next few days - does its drop back to below 1 (cases start falling in London)? flatten out at above 1 (cases continue to rise)? etc....

    The other interesting thing is the *possibility* that the rest of the country doesn't do a London style "wave" to R = 2.0, see the apparent drop in R numbers in other regions....
    One thing we can say for sure is that London cases aren't doubling every two days. Or every three days for that matter. Or even every week:

    What happens after Christmas we'll have to see but London has been bobbling around the twenty thousands for 11 days.
    The only statistic that really matters is how many people are in hospital with the Omicron variant. At the moment, very few.
    Er... could that be a facet of the inevitable lag between cases and hospitalisations?

    Hospitalisations are just beginning to show signs of trending upwards - two weeks after cases bagan to rise sharply.

    Still too early to say imo. We'll know by early January for sure.
    If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast.

    Big pressure on NHS is guaranteed, just unclear how bad and whether will exceed peak 1 and peak 2.
    Are you aware that there are only 366 people in the entire country in hospital with the Omicron variant?

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043866/20211224_OS_Daily_Omicron_Overview.pdf
    Early days yet....
    Yes but I was replying to a comment which said "If you look at London, hospitalisations are rising very fast." It's difficult for that to be correct if the figure for the whole UK is 366.
    Yes, but if sequencing takes a week, how up to date is that 366 figure?

    Surely with Omicron now the dominant variants across most of England, the majority of admissions are with Omicron. Unless you think that pandemic Omicron causes delta admissions by some mechanism.
  • AslanAslan Posts: 1,673

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    The definition of Institutionally Racist specifically excludes intent. It is about outcomes.

    It is my understanding that some of the legal challenges regarding the NHS mandatory vaccinations relate to claims that the NHS hasn't done it's homework on "not disproportionately affecting minorities".
    Then that is a stupid bloody definition and should be thrown out in the legislation.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    edited December 2021
    Aslan said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    The definition of Institutionally Racist specifically excludes intent. It is about outcomes.

    It is my understanding that some of the legal challenges regarding the NHS mandatory vaccinations relate to claims that the NHS hasn't done it's homework on "not disproportionately affecting minorities".
    Then that is a stupid bloody definition and should be thrown out in the legislation.
    One can see the arguments over, to take an obvious example, ‘stop and search’ policies (targeting knife crime) in London. The defenders of policies which disproportionately affect (even when they don’t deliberately target) say, young black males might argue that the carrying of knives in public is overwhelmingly concentrated in that segment of the population (and also possibly that, as disproportionate victims, they are the disproportionate beneficiaries of such policies). However, on the other side there is the problem that the totally innocent in the segment will also be disproportionately unjustly inconvenienced.

    But in the context of the mandatory vaccination requirement it becomes harder to neutrally argue from both sides. Are there any “totally innocent” amongst the vaccine hesitant (perhaps in context we should say “refuseniks”, as one would hope the merely “hesitant” would cease to be so as a result of the policy). Does it come down to whether their failure to comply is a consequence of rational or irrational decision making? And, if so, does historic suspicion of Govt authorities and medical authorities meet the thresholds? Alternatively does it make a difference (one way or the other) that the requirement is only targeting specific sectors (health, care workers), as opposed to a blanket nationwide approach to workplace settings? Does it make a difference whether the population segment is disproportionately affected because they are disproportionately over represented within this section of the workforce. Or because they are disproportionately over represented among the Unvaxxed?


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,569
    alex_ said:

    Aslan said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Fishing said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    God help us


    They are talking about THREE MONTHS


    "Scientists have looked at the effects of a potential return to step 2 restrictions from 28 December or 1 January, lasting either two weeks, four weeks or three months until 28 March. No 10 said the data had not yet been considered by ministers.

    "Step 2 – part of last year’s roadmap – includes a ban on indoor social mixing, a return of the rule of six, and bars and restaurants only able to serve outdoors."


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/24/decision-on-stricter-covid-rules-for-england-may-come-on-monday

    Fortunately the scientists have been substantially discredited by the fallout from the July modelling fiasco and the failure of Omicron to closely resemble the Black Death; the Prime Minister is very weak and his cabinet is full of lockdown sceptics; and there are a vast number of pissed off rebels on the Tory backbenches.

    That's not to say I'm sure we won't have another of these hideous lockdowns, but Johnson will find it very difficult to get through without destroying his career. And what does he care about most? Himself.
    The even more dismal Starmer might ride to his rescue.
    On the Parliamentary vote, yes, but Starmer has neither the interest nor the ability to save him from being fatally undermined by losing the support of 30-40% of his own MPs in a confidence ballot.
    I hope you're right, but that didn't stop him going for the last lot of restrictions.
    But the size of the rebellion put him on notice.

    Also the cabinet meeting, with presentation from scientific advisers, a few days ago did look very like buttering up his ministers to rubber stamp more Covid crap - and the rubber stamp was withheld.

    I don't know, there might be some more something-must-be-done-ism in due course (e.g. stupid mask theatre when you go to the loo down the pub,) but the great hope is that most of the cabinet and half the Tory backbenches won't wear another lockdown, and neither (as Tony Blair recently suggested) will the country. The public may be nearing the limit of its toleration of the "Protect the NHS" mantra and the demand for more sacrifices. Especially given that a significant minority of both NHS staff and the general population won't make the oh-so-dreadful sacrifice of a tiny scratch on the arm every few months.

    The Prime Minister should see to it that the refusers make all the sacrifices in future, and leave the rest of us alone.
    Why in the name of c*nting heaven have we not been harder on the refuseniks? are we really that scared of the racism thing, or the libertarian lobby? REALLY?

    A friend of mine is in Germany for Xmas. He just texted me the situation there. You basically can't MOVE without a vaxport. No bars, no restaurants, even shops can get sniffy, you need an FFP2 mask minimum everywhere or people shout, if you aren't jabbed you have zero life. At one point he had to do a test in a cafe before they served him, and he is triple injected.

    We are feeble as fuck in comparison.

    I don't want that in the UK, but enough now. Time to crack down on the vaxless
    Shutting the heel diggers out of pubs and theatres isn't going to work; trying to talk them all down slowly and patiently, one at a time, will be met with limited success and will take far, far too long.

    You have to strike at their viability. Make access to paid employment conditional on vaccination or a medical exemption. This, incidentally, ought also to help with the refuser problem in healthcare: they can't just threaten to flounce off to Aldi or something: unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution.

    This, of course, isn't going to happen. The Government won't be that ruthless, the Tory libertarians won't wear it, and Labour will never support something that disproportionately whacks poor and black people. But without that kind of sanction, vaxports are of marginal benefit at best.
    "unless they're willing and able to emigrate to seek alternative employment, then they'll have to give in or face destitution"

    So you want a policy that effectively throws large numbers of black, Muslim and other minorities out of the country?

    A policy that is provably Institutionally Racist?
    This is the sort of thing that the Labour Left would start screaming in the event of compulsion, but the criticism is misguided. It's an equal opportunities-friendly imposition. White vaccine refuser nurses would be just as free to choose either to comply or to find a more accommodating jurisdiction.

    There is an issue of intent here. The intention isn't to be nasty to minorities, it's to resolve the problem of a huge reservoir of potential victims for this disease, who are arguably increasing the length and severity of this ordeal for the entire community. Or, to put it another way, if we were to bring in harsher penalties for corrupt Members of Parliament, for example, this would disproportionately impact white men. It wouldn't make the measure either racist or sexist.
    The definition of Institutionally Racist specifically excludes intent. It is about outcomes.

    It is my understanding that some of the legal challenges regarding the NHS mandatory vaccinations relate to claims that the NHS hasn't done it's homework on "not disproportionately affecting minorities".
    Then that is a stupid bloody definition and should be thrown out in the legislation.
    One can see the arguments over, to take an obvious example, ‘stop and search’ policies (targeting knife crime) in London. The defenders of policies which disproportionately affect (even when they don’t deliberately target) say, young black males might argue that the carrying of knives in public is overwhelmingly concentrated in that segment of the population (and also possibly that, as disproportionate victims, they are the disproportionate beneficiaries of such policies). However, on the other side there is the problem that the totally innocent in the segment will also be disproportionately unjustly inconvenienced.

    But in the context of the mandatory vaccination requirement it becomes harder to neutrally argue from both sides. Are there any “totally innocent” amongst the vaccine hesitant (perhaps in context we should say “refuseniks”, as one would hope the merely “hesitant” would cease to be so as a result of the policy). Does it come down to whether their failure to comply is a consequence of rational or irrational decision making? And, if so, does historic suspicion of Govt authorities and medical authorities meet the thresholds? Alternatively does it make a difference (one way or the other) that the requirement is only targeting specific sectors (health, care workers), as opposed to a blanket nationwide approach to workplace settings? Does it make a difference whether the population segment is disproportionately affected because they are disproportionately over represented within this section of the workforce. Or because they are disproportionately over represented among the Unvaxxed?


    With the increasing numbers of breakthrough cases in the vaxxed compared to previous variants, compulsory vaccination does seem increasingly pointless as a control measure. It probably does reduce the risk of transmission a bit, but far from completely and doesn't get away from the need for PPE etc.
This discussion has been closed.