Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
I think may not. It doesn't show him leading Labour. And, as you say, it's downhill from here for him personally. Thus far, he's the nice bloke who handed out some cash.
@CorrectHorseBattery if the jabs aren't enough then they’ll have to be enough because we physically cant restrict social interaction indefinitely. It’s irrelevant if that would work in a computer model, its just not workable in reality and anyone pretending otherwise either has an agenda or is fooling themselves.
The guidelines here in Scotland strongly suggest my friends shouldn't meet up for our Hogmanay weekend away.
*Crickets*
Much rests on Sturgeon's statement on Wednesday. Invoke a law and that's our accommodation gone.
Let's see if she goes all in on the divergence at the border.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
No surprise, as I said only Boris could win most of the redwall, if he has lost it not even Sunak could win it back.
If Sunak does make progress it will partly be by rebuilding the Cameron coalition of 2015 ie those who went Tory in 2015 but have since gone LD or 2019 Tory voters now undecided. Sunak will not make much progress in regaining voters lost to Labour
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Today has closed that window for now, Boris has done the right thing (belatedly).
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
The Economist opposed the building of London's sewer system. I believe they thought we should learn to live with typhoid and cholera instead.
. Suffering and evil are nature’s admonitions””they cannot be got rid of; and the impatient attempts of benevolence to banish them from the world by legislation, before benevolence has learned their object and their end, have always been more productive of evil than good.
It is the folly of progress, much in evidence now as it has been for all time.
The main point is that you can deal with Covid and prevent associated avoidable deaths, in the same way that you can build sewers, but it always comes at a cost, and that has to be quantified and assessed. We know that there is a financial cost, of many unthinkable billions of pounds, but there is also a human cost which has not been assessed, also other costs that don't register, opportunity costs. And avoidable deaths that would not otherwise have occurred, for non covid related reasons. And so it goes on.
The inability of government and society to honestly run this calculation is a problem of civilisation ending proportions. It simply cannot comprehend a scenario where we accept that hundreds of thousands of people will die of natural causes, and insists we must do anything possible to avoid it, destroying our future in the process.
Yes, the "human cost" of building sewers is known to be... wait, I lost my place
Interestingly, there was an organised attempt at opposing the current sewer expansion in London, arguing that big infrastructure projects were evil, anti-environmental etc etc...
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Today has closed that window for now, Boris has done the right thing (belatedly).
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
The Economist opposed the building of London's sewer system. I believe they thought we should learn to live with typhoid and cholera instead.
. Suffering and evil are nature’s admonitions””they cannot be got rid of; and the impatient attempts of benevolence to banish them from the world by legislation, before benevolence has learned their object and their end, have always been more productive of evil than good.
It is the folly of progress, much in evidence now as it has been for all time.
The main point is that you can deal with Covid and prevent associated avoidable deaths, in the same way that you can build sewers, but it always comes at a cost, and that has to be quantified and assessed. We know that there is a financial cost, of many unthinkable billions of pounds, but there is also a human cost which has not been assessed, also other costs that don't register, opportunity costs. And avoidable deaths that would not otherwise have occurred, for non covid related reasons. And so it goes on.
The inability of government and society to honestly run this calculation is a problem of civilisation ending proportions. It simply cannot comprehend a scenario where we accept that hundreds of thousands of people will die of natural causes, and insists we must do anything possible to avoid it, destroying our future in the process.
Yes, the "human cost" of building sewers is known to be... wait, I lost my place
I just happened to be looking up details of a friend of my dad (Dr Roddy Ross, a well known piper and 'character') and noticed this resonant gem. This is a theory worthy of PB.
'Looking at the same aerial photos of Boreraig region you will see on the right side a hill road leading to Glendale. On this road is the famous stone — Clach Soraidh (Farewell Stone) which emigrants would kiss before making their way to Portree from where they would sail away, usually for ever.
What had happened was that an English GP, Dr Jenner, from Buckley, Gloucester, had in 1796 successfully developed a vaccine for smallpox. It rapidly was used in Europe and North America. The 40% who normally would have died from smallpox now lived, bringing about general starvation which in turn induced the spread of TB due to overcrowding. Emigration was the only answer — and here the MacLeod chiefs spent almost their all in transport fees. As did the Church of Scotland. And we must give thanks to the many MacLeod chiefs, who always stood loyally by their kinsmen, and also to the C. of S.'
Huh. Interesting idea. I knew there was issue with over-population and croft splitting (hence some of the incredibly narrow ones on Uist), but hadn't ever investigated why.
I was always told it the main reason for emigration was because the kelp got replaced by Whale oil, rather than enforced clearances (though this was a larger factor in Sutherland).
I knew there were much larger island populations by the end of the C18th than now but had never heard the smallpox theory as a reason.
I imagine there were varying contributory factors to H&I emigration at different times and in different areas. A pre vaccination 40% death rate for smallpox sounds very high for a population which had presumably developed some immunity.
The Economist opposed the building of London's sewer system. I believe they thought we should learn to live with typhoid and cholera instead.
. Suffering and evil are nature’s admonitions””they cannot be got rid of; and the impatient attempts of benevolence to banish them from the world by legislation, before benevolence has learned their object and their end, have always been more productive of evil than good.
It is the folly of progress, much in evidence now as it has been for all time.
The main point is that you can deal with Covid and prevent associated avoidable deaths, in the same way that you can build sewers, but it always comes at a cost, and that has to be quantified and assessed. We know that there is a financial cost, of many unthinkable billions of pounds, but there is also a human cost which has not been assessed, also other costs that don't register, opportunity costs. And avoidable deaths that would not otherwise have occurred, for non covid related reasons. And so it goes on.
The inability of government and society to honestly run this calculation is a problem of civilisation ending proportions. It simply cannot comprehend a scenario where we accept that hundreds of thousands of people will die of natural causes, and insists we must do anything possible to avoid it, destroying our future in the process.
Yes, the "human cost" of building sewers is known to be... wait, I lost my place
Interestingly, there was an organised attempt at opposing the current sewer expansion in London, arguing that big infrastructure projects were evil, anti-environmental etc etc...
Don't look at me, I'd approve it just for the archaeology we'd likely get from it. Think of all the middens, Roman breastplates, Carolingian coins, and Pepysian cheeses we might find!
Economists at Goldman Sachs predict the UK will grow by 4.8pc in the coming 12 months, well above the 3.5pc predicted for the US, 4pc for Germany and 4.4pc for both France and Italy. Canada and Japan’s GDP is also set to grow significantly slower.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
The Economist opposed the building of London's sewer system. I believe they thought we should learn to live with typhoid and cholera instead.
. Suffering and evil are nature’s admonitions””they cannot be got rid of; and the impatient attempts of benevolence to banish them from the world by legislation, before benevolence has learned their object and their end, have always been more productive of evil than good.
It is the folly of progress, much in evidence now as it has been for all time.
The main point is that you can deal with Covid and prevent associated avoidable deaths, in the same way that you can build sewers, but it always comes at a cost, and that has to be quantified and assessed. We know that there is a financial cost, of many unthinkable billions of pounds, but there is also a human cost which has not been assessed, also other costs that don't register, opportunity costs. And avoidable deaths that would not otherwise have occurred, for non covid related reasons. And so it goes on.
The inability of government and society to honestly run this calculation is a problem of civilisation ending proportions. It simply cannot comprehend a scenario where we accept that hundreds of thousands of people will die of natural causes, and insists we must do anything possible to avoid it, destroying our future in the process.
Yes, the "human cost" of building sewers is known to be... wait, I lost my place
Interestingly, there was an organised attempt at opposing the current sewer expansion in London, arguing that big infrastructure projects were evil, anti-environmental etc etc...
Don't look at me, I'd approve it just for the archaeology we'd likely get from it. Think of all the middens, Roman breastplates, Carolingian coins, and Pepysian cheeses we might find!
Greens are very very very shortsighted much of the time.
In the case of the plastic screens i recall there was a lot of people calling for their removal because they actually potentially increased the risks of transmission - because they restricted ventilation and potentially trapped Covid in little air pockets...
I expect when there is finally a proper inquiry into covid we are going to be told that a lot of what we did was a waste of time and money, and some of it will have proven to be counterproductive.
I'm not saying the rules being reinstated are definitely wrong, I'm wondering if a more transmissible variant and the now accepted belief that airborne transmission matters are still compatible with the original rules that were put in place. If they are that's fine, but I've not seen anything saying so.
I'm not sure it's correct even to say that the original rules were developed in response to the original Wuhan variant. We spent a long time discussing on here as long ago as back in March/April 2020 how they seemed more designed from assumptions for virus spread, rather than based on real world evidence. And they've just stuck around ever since, probably just to avoid confusing the message (and possibly because it was thought that some things - hands/face were just good hygiene practice anyway).
Meanwhile from a very early stage the Japanese (who decided that their constitution ruled out many of the extreme lockdown approaches ultimately implemented elsewhere) seemed to have grasped that the key was masks and ventilation and seemed to have a lot of early actual evidence to back this up. Largely ignored it seems by the rest of the world.
Helps that they are a nation used to ventilation. Used to have a Japanese-era flat in Taiwan. Had decorative, elaborate holes cut out of all the wooden internal walls to aid airflow. You could open up both ends to the outside with sliding windows too. Just mosquito netting remained. Used to cool the place in the steamy Summer. Here someone would be plastering them up to stop the bloody draught working whatever mysterious evil it is supposed to do.
This kind of depends on the age of the building.
Pre-war buildings have high ceilings, and don't really try to heat the room at all; You just cluster around a fire or more up-to-date-ly, tuck your legs under a blanket under a heated table. However there are hardly any of these left.
Post-war buildings up to the mid-eighties have low ceilings, usually not much ventilation and shitty thin walls. They're also very cold. The only way to stop them being cold is to literally add another layer of wall. That's what I did with my place. The normal solution is to knock them down and start again.
From the mid-eighties they started to get the insulation religion, airflow-wise I'd say they're basically the same as a new-ish build in the UK.
Shops and office buildings are the same as the UK.
Since basically nobody lives in the first kind I doubt it's the buildings that are helping. More the fact that the Japanese *immediately* worked out how the thing was transmitting based on their early experience with a cruise ship and gave us advice about airflow - for instance the TV was telling you the correct way to position two fans at different levels near a door to circulate air in a room with no windows. Meanwhile the British were trying to prevent some completely different disease for at least 6 months, as far as I can tell.
Economists at Goldman Sachs predict the UK will grow by 4.8pc in the coming 12 months, well above the 3.5pc predicted for the US, 4pc for Germany and 4.4pc for both France and Italy. Canada and Japan’s GDP is also set to grow significantly slower.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
Third behind USA and France on pre-pandemic levels (7%, 6.7%, 5.3%). Growth figures right now really need to take the depth of pandemic slumps into account, which were highly variable across the G7.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Today has closed that window for now, Boris has done the right thing (belatedly).
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
Your first paragraph relies very much on a wing and a prayer that the NHS doesn't topple over.
If you are right about us avoiding significant economic problems Sunak is indeed a genius. I would be highly surprised, no shocked, if there isn't a backlash over general inflation and energy inflation. Yes Sunak can do what he likes with VAT now, but as a Chancellor looking for the next buck, cutting VAT seems counter-intuitive.
2010 surprised me, however the landscape looks so different today. We had falling inflation and interest rates, cheap EU Labour, a tariff-free export market for our goods and services on our doorstep, Putin wasn't toying with energy supply and hence price, and China and cheap Chinese goods don't seem to be the answer they once were. And, as bad as the fall of Lehmann Bros was, it wasn't a global pandemic.
Economists at Goldman Sachs predict the UK will grow by 4.8pc in the coming 12 months, well above the 3.5pc predicted for the US, 4pc for Germany and 4.4pc for both France and Italy. Canada and Japan’s GDP is also set to grow significantly slower.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
Third behind USA and France on pre-pandemic levels (7%, 6.7%, 5.3%). Growth figures right now really need to take the depth of pandemic slumps into account, which were highly variable across the G7.
These numbers just make me worried about inflation
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Not a Tory fan boy.
I'm a "having a life" fan boy. Now, on this very narrow point, I find myself aligned with Johnson.
I can't imagine Sturgeon/Drakeford at a party. Burnham perhaps, and there is hope for Starmer too.
Yes, except for the bit about Starmer. He'd lock us down forever. It's the public prosecutor in him. His instinct is always for more rules. Burnham meanwhile, yes - he has been consistently more libertarian than either Starmer, and at times more libertarian than Boris.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Today has closed that window for now, Boris has done the right thing (belatedly).
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
Of course, 2010-15 did destroy a governing party.
Just not the larger one.
(And since no austerity = no Brexit, it mopped up Cameron just over a year later, to boot.)
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's the right call because there is not the evidence to lockdown further - and lockdowns are such a fundamentally illiberal tool that they must only be used when there is very clear evidence that they are needed - and not 'just in case'.
Economists at Goldman Sachs predict the UK will grow by 4.8pc in the coming 12 months, well above the 3.5pc predicted for the US, 4pc for Germany and 4.4pc for both France and Italy. Canada and Japan’s GDP is also set to grow significantly slower.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
The Royal parasites should fund their own yacht, we shouldn't spend this money on the country's largest benefit scroungers, but use the money to look after our children.
England could fit an air purifier to every classroom for half the price of the new royal yacht, a move which scientists and campaigners say would significantly reduce the spread of Covid in schools.
The move would cost about £140m, according to calculations by the Liberal Democrats. Government sources have said there will be no delay to the start of the school term, despite surging Omicron cases, and that any additional restrictions will not include classroom closures.
I broadly agree with the idea, but last year a US expert put a much higher figure* proportionally on doing the same thing for schools in the US. And he also concluded it wasn't really feasible as the supply simply didn't exist to do the job at that time. Look at the bottom of the article, New York City alone is distributing 100,000 HEPA purifiers. It is probably a good idea, and certainly better than many other measures that have been taken, but good air filtration fitted to schools will take quite a bit of time and almost certainly a lot more than £140 million.
* I don't remember exactly what it was but it was many billions of dollars to fit and supply all US classrooms.
I think we are being subjected to Lib Dem Maths in search of a headline.
A normal classroom is a little under 200 cubic metres, and has around 30 people in it for 6-7 hours a day. Can anyone come up with a public building enclosed space grade HEPA air purifier, and deliver, certify (PAT test etc), and fit it for £230?
If not, I'm inclined to call bullshit on this.
It's not quite the same thing but I recall getting air conditioning for a classroom sized office costing somewhere around £15,000, and that was years and years ago. I suspect this is one of those things where you can do a cheap bodge job or you can do it right, and the price difference between the two will be large.
Air conditioning is *massively* more expensive. A HEPA air purifier is just sucking air in one end and out the other, allowing it to pass under a UV light and through some replaceable filters.
Economists at Goldman Sachs predict the UK will grow by 4.8pc in the coming 12 months, well above the 3.5pc predicted for the US, 4pc for Germany and 4.4pc for both France and Italy. Canada and Japan’s GDP is also set to grow significantly slower.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
If we are honest, apart from political geeks on here, do the public know anything about Sunak at all? I’m wary of polling like this. Better to pull over one hundred punters in the street and show pictures of politicians and see how many they recognise.
They will when inflation hits 7%, their energy bills increase by 50% and their house and lease cars get repossessed.
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Today has closed that window for now, Boris has done the right thing (belatedly).
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
Of course, 2010-15 did destroy a governing party.
Just not the larger one.
(And since no austerity = no Brexit, it mopped up Cameron just over a year later, to boot.)
I don't think the economy destroyed the Lib Dems, they destroyed themselves via their own choices. They destroyed their own raison d'etre.
No guarantee that no austerity = no Brexit. There's a reason Blair and Brown never held a referendum on the Euro or Lisbon. The groundswell for potentially rejecting Europe preceded Lehman Brothers.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Not a Tory fan boy.
I'm a "having a life" fan boy. Now, on this very narrow point, I find myself aligned with Johnson.
I can't imagine Sturgeon/Drakeford at a party. Burnham perhaps, and there is hope for Starmer too.
Yes, except for the bit about Starmer. He'd lock us down forever. It's the public prosecutor in him. His instinct is always for more rules. Burnham meanwhile, yes - he has been consistently more libertarian than either Starmer, and at times more libertarian than Boris.
Never let it be forgotten that Drakeford is Starmer's idol as he constantly refers to him for the way he has dealt with covid
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
If that's your frame of reference there's only a single fanboy on this site: HYUFD.
Boris has in the past twelve months lost for one thing or another every single "PB Tory" I can think of.
The booster target has been met since everyone has been offered the booster. Anyone who hasn't had it, it's because they've chosen not to rather than due to a lack of slots.
What do you expect? Should everyone who refuses the booster be arrested, manhandled and forcibly jabbed against their will?
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Not a Tory fan boy.
I'm a "having a life" fan boy. Now, on this very narrow point, I find myself aligned with Johnson.
I can't imagine Sturgeon/Drakeford at a party. Burnham perhaps, and there is hope for Starmer too.
Yes, except for the bit about Starmer. He'd lock us down forever. It's the public prosecutor in him. His instinct is always for more rules. Burnham meanwhile, yes - he has been consistently more libertarian than either Starmer, and at times more libertarian than Boris.
Never let it be forgotten that Drakeford is Starmer's idol as he constantly refers to him for the way he has dealt with covid
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
I think they really cocked up the booster programme.
- Not doing it earlier. This is partly the JCVI's fault, and all the silly talk over vaccinating 1 billion people in Africa first
- The mad rush to have it done before Christmas. My friends are diligent, public minded folk and queued for 3 hours to get their jab. I'm certain there are millions of younger people who don't care enough to wait for even 15 minutes, and won't go and try again.
- Linking boosters to freedoms. This was always going to backfire if they weren't enough to stop a new surge.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I don't deny who I am. I just don't want to be doxxed. Common courtesy would respect that.
I note you aren't using your full real name here. You're not a hypocrite are you?
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Not a Tory fan boy.
I'm a "having a life" fan boy. Now, on this very narrow point, I find myself aligned with Johnson.
I can't imagine Sturgeon/Drakeford at a party. Burnham perhaps, and there is hope for Starmer too.
Yes, except for the bit about Starmer. He'd lock us down forever. It's the public prosecutor in him. His instinct is always for more rules. Burnham meanwhile, yes - he has been consistently more libertarian than either Starmer, and at times more libertarian than Boris.
Never let it be forgotten that Drakeford is Starmer's idol as he constantly refers to him for the way he has dealt with covid
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
I think you're being a wee bit over-tribal here. You're in danger of labelling anyone who isn't constantly critical of Boris as a Tory fanboy. The world isn't divided into Tories and not-Tories. Most people have their own preferences of how they'd like the world to be. Sometimes this aligns with what one party does, sometimes not. I voted Tory in 2019 for one reason and one reason only: Corbyn. They have run the pandemic other than how I would have liked, but consistently Labour have been clear that they would have been even further from what I would want. I've been highly critical of the Tories when they have been too pro-lockdown for my preferences, and have been more enthusiastic when they have moved in the other direction. But everyone has their own priorities. For some it's probity, for some it's Britain's place in the world, for some it's approach to the welfare state. Sometimes these preferences might align with what one party does, sometimes not. The world slots into more than two camps.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
I think you're being a wee bit over-tribal here. You're in danger of labelling anyone who isn't constantly critical of Boris as a Tory fanboy. The world isn't divided into Tories and not-Tories. Most people have their own preferences of how they'd like the world to be. Sometimes this aligns with what one party does, sometimes not. I voted Tory in 2019 for one reason and one reason only: Corbyn. They have run the pandemic other than how I would have liked, but consistently Labour have been clear that they would have been even further from what I would want. I've been highly critical of the Tories when they have been too pro-lockdown for my preferences, and have been more enthusiastic when they have moved in the other direction. But everyone has their own priorities. For some it's probity, for some it's Britain's place in the world, for some it's approach to the welfare state. Sometimes these preferences might align with what one party does, sometimes not. The world slots into more than two camps.
And Stokes gone....back down to praying Roooooooooooot can pull off a miracle.
According to the BBC live text, it kept a bit low and hit the top of middle stump. Interesting combination.
On the ball tracker I don't think it showed that. It moved in on him with decent bounce, but even without the movement it was hitting his off stump, but he just sort of prodded after the ball had gone past. It looked like the shot of a man who hasn't played much cricket.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I don't deny who I am. I just don't want to be doxxed. Common courtesy would respect that.
I note you aren't using your full real name here. You're not a hypocrite are you?
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
No Pete. See my post earlier: lockdown is wrong without a very clear reason. 'Just in case' is not good enough. So resisting calls for a lockdown is the right call (for me). And Plan B was the wrong call (for me).
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
I think you're being a wee bit over-tribal here. You're in danger of labelling anyone who isn't constantly critical of Boris as a Tory fanboy. The world isn't divided into Tories and not-Tories. Most people have their own preferences of how they'd like the world to be. Sometimes this aligns with what one party does, sometimes not. I voted Tory in 2019 for one reason and one reason only: Corbyn. They have run the pandemic other than how I would have liked, but consistently Labour have been clear that they would have been even further from what I would want. I've been highly critical of the Tories when they have been too pro-lockdown for my preferences, and have been more enthusiastic when they have moved in the other direction. But everyone has their own priorities. For some it's probity, for some it's Britain's place in the world, for some it's approach to the welfare state. Sometimes these preferences might align with what one party does, sometimes not. The world slots into more than two camps.
Not at all, just think that labelling Johnson as making a superb call seems awfully premature, if in a few weeks it's proved to be right, then well done him. For now, I will remain concerned.
I do agree that the evidence isn't right for a lockdown at the moment. But the headlines and the stuff leaking out is already concerning me, we're running the risk of complacency again which has always done us badly before.
And thanks for not jumping down my throat, I don't consider you a fanboy anyway and that post was not aimed at you, it was aimed at some other people
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
No Pete. See my post earlier: lockdown is wrong without a very clear reason. 'Just in case' is not good enough. So resisting calls for a lockdown is the right call (for me). And Plan B was the wrong call (for me).
I'm grateful to PB posters for planting this idea in my head.
I'm not anti-lockdown in the same way others are, but the burden of proof has to lie with restrictions, not liberty.
This is the fundamental difference with the approach taken in Scotland, where the precautionary principle is more important.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
It seems awfully early to be saying this is the right call
It's always the right call for the fanbois. If Johnson has called it wrong they will just change their terms of reference.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
No Pete. See my post earlier: lockdown is wrong without a very clear reason. 'Just in case' is not good enough. So resisting calls for a lockdown is the right call (for me). And Plan B was the wrong call (for me).
100% this. 💯
If you want to take away someone's civil liberties then the burden of proof that it is necessary needs to be met beyond all reasonable doubt. It hasn't been. It is inexcusable therefore to take away liberties now.
Just going to say again, I don't support a lockdown at the moment as the evidence isn't there.
But I also don't support "just get on with it", I support a cautious approach and I am deeply concerned still about hospitalisations going forward and waning immunity. I am concerned that complacency will creep in again.
I consider this a very rational response to the pandemic based on what we've seen so far.
Interesting - Sunak improves the Tory position by:
- Winning back 2019 Con voters who currently say 'don't know' - Wining 1 in 6(!) voters currently backing LDs.
He makes no net gains from Labour at all - gains 3% of voters currently intending to vote Lab, but loses 3% to Lab.
No surprise, as I said only Boris could win most of the redwall, if he has lost it not even Sunak could win it back.
If Sunak does make progress it will partly be by rebuilding the Cameron coalition of 2015 ie those who went Tory in 2015 but have since gone LD or 2019 Tory voters now undecided. Sunak will not make much progress in regaining voters lost to Labour
I always respect HYUFD's analysis, which he keeps separate from his preferences. (That clarity of judgement may be what Epping Tories value too.) I think that's correct. The only snag is that the MRPs analyses seem to suggest that the Blue Wall isn't really under threat unless there's a Lab-Lib deal, despite what North Shropshire and C&A suggest - so boosting Tory votes in seats like mine (Surrey SW - latest MRP puts it at Con 43 LD 29 Lab 23) may not make much difference.
Jesus Christ, the booster target met? Are you having a laugh?
Under what possible definition hasn't it been? Literally anyone can go online and get an appointment. If anyone hasn't that's their choice.
Should we have an army of Judge Dredd drones jabbing the unwilling?
It hasn't been met, but it was never going to be.
This is like one of the pointless arguments over Hancock's targets last year. The point was to kick the NHS/civil service into gear and that looks like it happened (though ineffectual for most young people, as I pointed out above).
Jesus Christ, the booster target met? Are you having a laugh?
Under what possible definition hasn't it been? Literally anyone can go online and get an appointment. If anyone hasn't that's their choice.
Should we have an army of Judge Dredd drones jabbing the unwilling?
It hasn't been met, but it was never going to be.
This is like one of the pointless arguments over Hancock's targets last year. The point was to kick the NHS/civil service into gear and that looks like it happened (though ineffectual for most young people, as I pointed out above).
I completely agree with that - but the bloke above still feels the need to make up nonsense about the target. Just makes them look silly and the very thing they claim not to be, i.e. a BoJo fanboy.
If I was doing the same thing for Starmer, they'd call me a muppet and rightfully so
I think I would have gone for target of capacity of doing at least a million a day, saying that by doing so, that would be enough capacity for anybody who wants a booster jab by the start of Jan....
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I don't deny who I am. I just don't want to be doxxed. Common courtesy would respect that.
I note you aren't using your full real name here. You're not a hypocrite are you?
Please respect my privacy.
I can't believe how childish people are being about your wish to post pseudonymously. I guess I'm glad that I'm not considered important enough to be hounded for my successive different accounts on here.
I think I would have gone for target of capacity of doing at least a million a day, saying that by doing so, that would be enough capacity for anybody who wants a booster jab by the start of Jan....
It is neither dishonest nor unreasonable.
Has something happened, I find myself agreeing with the majority of your posts
Jesus Christ, the booster target met? Are you having a laugh?
Under what possible definition hasn't it been? Literally anyone can go online and get an appointment. If anyone hasn't that's their choice.
Should we have an army of Judge Dredd drones jabbing the unwilling?
Bear in mind we've also had nearly an extra 2 million cases over the past month - this will be people who aren't allowed to have a vaccine dose until it's been four weeks since their positive test. Many of them will be happy to have a booster dose when they're allowed to in January.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I don't deny who I am. I just don't want to be doxxed. Common courtesy would respect that.
I note you aren't using your full real name here. You're not a hypocrite are you?
Please respect my privacy.
It’s none of my business at all, but I must confess a certain curiosity as to why, after tens of thousands of posts under your previous moniker, you’ve suddenly decided to adopt a pseudonym.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I know you are a relative newcomer to the site so it is worth pointing out - without going into specific details - that posters have lost their jobs after being outed for posting on PB. Speculating on who a poster is and why they are choosing to post anonymously is, for most of us, extremely poor behaviour.
Truss's wonder-deals revealed in all their glory...
'“It turns out our greatest competitor on the planet is the UK government because every time they do a fantastic deal, they kick us out of that market – starting with the Brexit deal,” he said. ... And now we’ve also lost Norway since the trade deal, as duty for wholesale is 273%. Then we tried Canada but what the government didn’t tell us is that duty of 244% is applied on any consignment over $20 [£15].'
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I know you are a relative newcomer to the site so it is worth pointing out - without going into specific details - that posters have lost their jobs after being outed for posting on PB. Speculating on who a poster is and why they are choosing to post anonymously is, for most of us, extremely poor behaviour.
Tory fanboys needed a reason to get back on Daddy Boris' lap and he's given them one
Credit where credit is due.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Have many of your 161 posts vehemently objected to BJ’s restrictions? Must have missed them.
Eh? Bart's predecessor was nothing but complaints about Boris's restrictions.
How dare you suggest there was a predecessor! BartholipThombertson will be along to give you a good ticking off shortly.
Any suggestion that Marathon (nougat, caramel and peanuts enrobed in milk chocolate) and Snickers (chocolate-covered peanuts, caramel and nougat) are in any way related will result in an immediate and sustained tirade.
I know you are a relative newcomer to the site so it is worth pointing out - without going into specific details - that posters have lost their jobs after being outed for posting on PB. Speculating on who a poster is and why they are choosing to post anonymously is, for most of us, extremely poor behaviour.
I mentioned "Marathon" and "Snickers" FFS 🙄
Yep, I apologise my post came over as if I was attacking you for what you wrote but I was rather pointing out that what you consider to be an amusing and probably somewhat daft move by a poster is based not on a speculative problem but on an issue that has been very real in the past.
Jesus Christ, the booster target met? Are you having a laugh?
Under what possible definition hasn't it been? Literally anyone can go online and get an appointment. If anyone hasn't that's their choice.
Should we have an army of Judge Dredd drones jabbing the unwilling?
I get it now. Anonymity can be important to keeping employment and other important things. For some. You know my real name because I tried posting under it, but I don’t have a job or any reputation to lose.
Welcome new poster Bart. Can I shorten it to Bart? What is your take on energy crisis. Do you regard it as crisis?
Dr John Campbell is always banging on about Vitamin D and this time last year the government ran a free supplement program. Was there any hard evidence that vitamin d deficiency was a risk factor?
Because obviously vitamin supplements are dirt cheap.
Comments
Sunak has a very small (sorry!) window of opportunity. He needs Johnson to crash and burn very quickly. Today may (or may not) have opened that small window a touch further.
Thus far, he's the nice bloke who handed out some cash.
*Crickets*
Much rests on Sturgeon's statement on Wednesday. Invoke a law and that's our accommodation gone.
Let's see if she goes all in on the divergence at the border.
If Sunak does make progress it will partly be by rebuilding the Cameron coalition of 2015 ie those who went Tory in 2015 but have since gone LD or 2019 Tory voters now undecided. Sunak will not make much progress in regaining voters lost to Labour
As far as "economic bad news around the corner destroying the Chancellor/government" people have been spinning that yarn for over a decade now. Remember in January 2010 it was said that whoever won the 2010 election would have a poisoned chalice because the choice they'd need to make on the economy would destroy them? Didn't exactly happen though did it?
The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out, and the Chancellor has a lot of economic tools at his disposal.
I imagine there were varying contributory factors to H&I emigration at different times and in different areas. A pre vaccination 40% death rate for smallpox sounds very high for a population which had presumably developed some immunity.
Boris is the only leader in the UK to have done the right thing and said no to restrictions.
If I'm going to object vehemently when Boris imposes them, it's only reasonable to give him credit when he alone doesn't.
To do otherwise would be unprincipled and partisan.
Similarly HSBC expects British GDP to rise by 4.7pc in 2022. Its forecasts for the rest of the G7 range between 2.2pc for Japan and 4.3pc in Italy.
The IMF also expects Britain to outgrow the rest of the G7 club in the coming year.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/12/27/uk-economy-cast-omicrons-shadow-outpace-rest-g7/
Pre-war buildings have high ceilings, and don't really try to heat the room at all; You just cluster around a fire or more up-to-date-ly, tuck your legs under a blanket under a heated table. However there are hardly any of these left.
Post-war buildings up to the mid-eighties have low ceilings, usually not much ventilation and shitty thin walls. They're also very cold. The only way to stop them being cold is to literally add another layer of wall. That's what I did with my place. The normal solution is to knock them down and start again.
From the mid-eighties they started to get the insulation religion, airflow-wise I'd say they're basically the same as a new-ish build in the UK.
Shops and office buildings are the same as the UK.
Since basically nobody lives in the first kind I doubt it's the buildings that are helping. More the fact that the Japanese *immediately* worked out how the thing was transmitting based on their early experience with a cruise ship and gave us advice about airflow - for instance the TV was telling you the correct way to position two fans at different levels near a door to circulate air in a room with no windows. Meanwhile the British were trying to prevent some completely different disease for at least 6 months, as far as I can tell.
Growth figures right now really need to take the depth of pandemic slumps into account, which were highly variable across the G7.
If you are right about us avoiding significant economic problems Sunak is indeed a genius. I would be highly surprised, no shocked, if there isn't a backlash over general inflation and energy inflation. Yes Sunak can do what he likes with VAT now, but as a Chancellor looking for the next buck, cutting VAT seems counter-intuitive.
2010 surprised me, however the landscape looks so different today. We had falling inflation and interest rates, cheap EU Labour, a tariff-free export market for our goods and services on our doorstep, Putin wasn't toying with energy supply and hence price, and China and cheap Chinese goods don't seem to be the answer they once were. And, as bad as the fall of Lehmann Bros was, it wasn't a global pandemic.
I'm a "having a life" fan boy. Now, on this very narrow point, I find myself aligned with Johnson.
I can't imagine Sturgeon/Drakeford at a party. Burnham perhaps, and there is hope for Starmer too.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/cricket/57164653
They won't be allowed to go up by another 50%, especially as it is significantly driven by a poor algorithm to calculate the ceiling.
In the "average" bill of around £1250 there are about £225 of VAT and green levies for a start.
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/infographic-bills-prices-and-profits
The Govt are due to bring out a new Green scheme, so that £182 of green levy can be rolled in there.
I'd say the average will stay under £1500, as being a politically acceptable level. Or perhaps less.
£2000? Unlikely.
Expect a political something in Jan/Feb.
Burnham meanwhile, yes - he has been consistently more libertarian than either Starmer, and at times more libertarian than Boris.
Just not the larger one.
(And since no austerity = no Brexit, it mopped up Cameron just over a year later, to boot.)
Remember that the current crisis is still mainly the delta wave.
You saw how this works earlier today when you commented on the missed booster target that turned out not to be a target, despite it having been hit because it was only an offer of a booster anyway. Confused? Me too.
"The future is never quite as certain as people like to make out"
To
This forecast validates me!
36 minutes.
No guarantee that no austerity = no Brexit. There's a reason Blair and Brown never held a referendum on the Euro or Lisbon. The groundswell for potentially rejecting Europe preceded Lehman Brothers.
Boris has in the past twelve months lost for one thing or another every single "PB Tory" I can think of.
The booster target has been met since everyone has been offered the booster. Anyone who hasn't had it, it's because they've chosen not to rather than due to a lack of slots.
What do you expect? Should everyone who refuses the booster be arrested, manhandled and forcibly jabbed against their will?
- Not doing it earlier. This is partly the JCVI's fault, and all the silly talk over vaccinating 1 billion people in Africa first
- The mad rush to have it done before Christmas. My friends are diligent, public minded folk and queued for 3 hours to get their jab. I'm certain there are millions of younger people who don't care enough to wait for even 15 minutes, and won't go and try again.
- Linking boosters to freedoms. This was always going to backfire if they weren't enough to stop a new surge.
I note you aren't using your full real name here. You're not a hypocrite are you?
Please respect my privacy.
I wonder if we might see Stokes give up test cricket and concentrate on one day games. He clearly is never fully fit these days.
But everyone has their own priorities. For some it's probity, for some it's Britain's place in the world, for some it's approach to the welfare state. Sometimes these preferences might align with what one party does, sometimes not. The world slots into more than two camps.
See my post earlier: lockdown is wrong without a very clear reason. 'Just in case' is not good enough. So resisting calls for a lockdown is the right call (for me). And Plan B was the wrong call (for me).
I do agree that the evidence isn't right for a lockdown at the moment. But the headlines and the stuff leaking out is already concerning me, we're running the risk of complacency again which has always done us badly before.
And thanks for not jumping down my throat, I don't consider you a fanboy anyway and that post was not aimed at you, it was aimed at some other people
I'm not anti-lockdown in the same way others are, but the burden of proof has to lie with restrictions, not liberty.
This is the fundamental difference with the approach taken in Scotland, where the precautionary principle is more important.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-59803771
If you want to take away someone's civil liberties then the burden of proof that it is necessary needs to be met beyond all reasonable doubt. It hasn't been. It is inexcusable therefore to take away liberties now.
"Just in case" is never acceptable.
But I also don't support "just get on with it", I support a cautious approach and I am deeply concerned still about hospitalisations going forward and waning immunity. I am concerned that complacency will creep in again.
I consider this a very rational response to the pandemic based on what we've seen so far.
Should we have an army of Judge Dredd drones jabbing the unwilling?
This is like one of the pointless arguments over Hancock's targets last year. The point was to kick the NHS/civil service into gear and that looks like it happened (though ineffectual for most young people, as I pointed out above).
If I was doing the same thing for Starmer, they'd call me a muppet and rightfully so
It is neither dishonest nor unreasonable.
Not sure England will make the lunch break.
61/7.
'“It turns out our greatest competitor on the planet is the UK government because every time they do a fantastic deal, they kick us out of that market – starting with the Brexit deal,” he said.
...
And now we’ve also lost Norway since the trade deal, as duty for wholesale is 273%. Then we tried Canada but what the government didn’t tell us is that duty of 244% is applied on any consignment over $20 [£15].'
- https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/27/brexit-the-biggest-disaster-that-any-government-has-ever-negotiated
Please respect their privacy.
Welcome new poster Bart. Can I shorten it to Bart? What is your take on energy crisis. Do you regard it as crisis?
One of the sickest Covid patients is home for Christmas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MDMhMa9xbA
Well that was a humiliation.
Why don’t China have a cricket team?
Because they eat bats and have no concept of boundaries.
THIS THREAD IS ALL OUT FOR A PALTRY SCORE.
New thread 🙂