BREAKING: Italy makes COVID-19 vaccination legally mandatory for those 50 and older
Any reports of how it will be enforced? And does this not discriminate (age)? And isn’t this othering @Charles?
It’s not othering - I don’t think it is right to require mandatory vaccination but that’s a different topic.
I’ve resisted using the obvious example because people jump to the wrong conclusion based on it. I’m am not making any comparison between the potential treatment of the unvaccinated and this example. However it may serve to make the concept clearer to you: the best recent example of othering is requiring Jewish citizens of Nazi Germany to wear yellow stars, clearly marking them out as being different to most Germans. That created a class of people who were “other” and who, over time.l, faced discrimination and worse.
How is he not discriminated against here? He is not allowed to compete simply because of his vaccination status.
Nope. He's not allowed in the country because of his vaccination status.
Same thing, decfacto.
Yes but. Numerous countries require proof of vaccination. I needed a few to get a Taiwanese visa 30 years ago. We needed HIV, hepatitis, syphilis tests yearly for renewal. This isn't new.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
The only chance of a lockdown comes from an omicron type variant that creates more serious illness.
The people who thought judges were enemies of the people and that activist lawyers are frustrating the noble intentions of HMG will be moving on to the juries. Who's left in the legal system to demonise, court ushers?
It's such a shame that the gammon society is upset...
Cheap shot. I don't know much about 'Save Our Statues' but they're making a substantive point that should be addressed.
It isn't open season on statues.
It does show however that juries will use their powers to acquit people if laws are used harshly to suppress legitimate dissent. Indeed that is how the original Penn case came to set the precedent.
Sorry but it strikes me as populist justice. There are plenty of ways people could show 'legitimate dissent' without having to tear the statue down.
No it is a long established principle that juries can refuse to enforce oppressive laws. It is the sort of ancient British custom that supposed patriots dislike.
Causing criminal damage is an oppressive law?
No but criminalising protest is.
As is planned via the new Police Bill.
But surely wat they did was more than protest?
In effect the jury decided their protesting actions were legal.
Worth bearing in mind that the law is very clear on this as I understand it. This does not set any form of precedent. The decision was specific to this case alone. So they have not decided that criminal damage - even in an identical situation - is legal. Just that in this case they would not return a guilty verdict.
I thought it was dire, but because of the atrocious plot, acting, sets, continuity etc. However, I thought the male lead, an Englishman apparently, did a good Scottish accent. He’d been totally slated in social media, but I thought he was one of the less annoying features.
Didn't see it. Did they have Gregor Fisher as the ghillie, I wonder?
Urgh. Even the name Dun Dunbar castle ... it's like saying Fort Fort William.
When the issue of renaming American army bases named after Confederates came up, a number of people said they should rename one after - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fort
Just so you could have Fort Fort.....
There is of course Townsville in North Queensland...
I was told by a Kiwi that the reason that there are so many Rotoruas and Rototoities in New Zealand is from early settlers. They would come over the hill, point at a lake and ask what it was called. Their guide would say "Rotorua" (lake) or "Rototoiti" (another lake).
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Maxwell defence calls for retrial after juror says he was 'a victim of sexual abuse'
Bloody jurors spouting to the media is something we can be grateful for here. Can you imagine the stampede for this Colston jury? And their private lives and political positions being raked over? Whether you agree with them or not this is surely a great thing about our system.
BREAKING: Italy makes COVID-19 vaccination legally mandatory for those 50 and older
Any reports of how it will be enforced? And does this not discriminate (age)? And isn’t this othering @Charles?
It’s not othering - I don’t think it is right to require mandatory vaccination but that’s a different topic.
I’ve resisted using the obvious example because people jump to the wrong conclusion based on it. I’m am not making any comparison between the potential treatment of the unvaccinated and this example. However it may serve to make the concept clearer to you: the best recent example of othering is requiring Jewish citizens of Nazi Germany to wear yellow stars, clearly marking them out as being different to most Germans. That created a class of people who were “other” and who, over time.l, faced discrimination and worse.
How is he not discriminated against here? He is not allowed to compete simply because of his vaccination status.
Nope. He's not allowed in the country because of his vaccination status.
Same thing, decfacto.
Yes but. Numerous countries require proof of vaccination. I needed a few to get a Taiwanese visa 30 years ago. We needed HIV, hepatitis, syphilis tests yearly for renewal. This isn't new.
Not only that my father-in-law refuses to get a passport and now he finds he's been othered by just about every country in the world. Shocking!
I thought it was dire, but because of the atrocious plot, acting, sets, continuity etc. However, I thought the male lead, an Englishman apparently, did a good Scottish accent. He’d been totally slated in social media, but I thought he was one of the less annoying features.
Didn't see it. Did they have Gregor Fisher as the ghillie, I wonder?
Urgh. Even the name Dun Dunbar castle ... it's like saying Fort Fort William.
When the issue of renaming American army bases named after Confederates came up, a number of people said they should rename one after - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fort
Just so you could have Fort Fort.....
There is a place called Forty Fort, which has a very boatey mcboatface vibe to it. Ahead of its time perhaps.
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
London has more hospital beds per capita because of national quaternary centres, and the next hospital is much closer to divert ambulances to when overloaded. From Leicester it is a lot further to Coventry, Nottingham or Peterborough.
Maxwell defence calls for retrial after juror says he was 'a victim of sexual abuse'
Bloody jurors spouting to the media is something we can be grateful for here. Can you imagine the stampede for this Colston jury? And their private lives and political positions being raked over? Whether you agree with them or not this is surely a great thing about our system.
Although isn't a feature of US jury service that 100s get called to a trial and the lawyers whittle it all down to 12 good citizens by asking them a zillion questions about their life and views and past? Seems here someone has either lied or someone else dropped a bollock?
The people who thought judges were enemies of the people and that activist lawyers are frustrating the noble intentions of HMG will be moving on to the juries. Who's left in the legal system to demonise, court ushers?
It's such a shame that the gammon society is upset...
Cheap shot. I don't know much about 'Save Our Statues' but they're making a substantive point that should be addressed.
It isn't open season on statues.
It does show however that juries will use their powers to acquit people if laws are used harshly to suppress legitimate dissent. Indeed that is how the original Penn case came to set the precedent.
Sorry but it strikes me as populist justice. There are plenty of ways people could show 'legitimate dissent' without having to tear the statue down.
No it is a long established principle that juries can refuse to enforce oppressive laws. It is the sort of ancient British custom that supposed patriots dislike.
Causing criminal damage is an oppressive law?
No but criminalising protest is.
As is planned via the new Police Bill.
But surely wat they did was more than protest?
In effect the jury decided their protesting actions were legal.
They were found not guilty. The burden being on the side of the prosecution.
Maxwell defence calls for retrial after juror says he was 'a victim of sexual abuse'
Bloody jurors spouting to the media is something we can be grateful for here. Can you imagine the stampede for this Colston jury? And their private lives and political positions being raked over? Whether you agree with them or not this is surely a great thing about our system.
Although isn't a feature of US jury service that 100s get called to a trial and the lawyers whittle it all down to 12 good citizens by asking them a zillion questions about their life and views and past? Seems here someone has either lied or someone else dropped a bollock?
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
The only chance of a lockdown comes from an omicron type variant that creates more serious illness.
I don’t think it’s likely but it’s possible.
Yes. Unforeseen was a spectacularly ill-chosen word. As that was precisely the scenario I was foreseeing....must do better.
Starmer forgets his "third British value" and has to drink water to recover his composure
It matters little in itself but let it be noted that Starmer was under zero pressure here, and he was still shit. He is no Blair. He might not even be Gordon Brown. I can see him losing, valiantly, against an equally fading Boris Johnson and an equally shop-worn Nicola Sturgeon. They will all look objectionably old and boring by then
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Not sure how long this will last but you can still lay Jokovic on Betfair. Assuming he is toast, pretty easy money. DAYOR.
Ooh ta!
Although see the rules about cancelling bets if he doesn’t start. I think there is risk free profit here, but you may need to cash out at the right time...
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
The level of vaccination is far higher outside London than inside, so I'm hoping that will mean there isn't too much of a problem in the rest of the country. London famously has about a third of people totally unjabbed, which is a figure I still find hard to believe.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
This is an old idea.
I remember in March (?) 2020 behavioural scientists types suggesting the three week lockdown had to be timed perfectly.
Lasted longer and said scientists were surprised by our good behaviour.
Putting my tongue in cheek, it seems the good old British public made a mistake by obeying the first lockdown. Now it has become an acceptable tool to be rolled out potentially ever winter. If we had just disobeyed back in april 2020 then we would be fine now.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
The people who thought judges were enemies of the people and that activist lawyers are frustrating the noble intentions of HMG will be moving on to the juries. Who's left in the legal system to demonise, court ushers?
It's such a shame that the gammon society is upset...
Cheap shot. I don't know much about 'Save Our Statues' but they're making a substantive point that should be addressed.
It isn't open season on statues.
It does show however that juries will use their powers to acquit people if laws are used harshly to suppress legitimate dissent. Indeed that is how the original Penn case came to set the precedent.
Sorry but it strikes me as populist justice. There are plenty of ways people could show 'legitimate dissent' without having to tear the statue down.
No it is a long established principle that juries can refuse to enforce oppressive laws. It is the sort of ancient British custom that supposed patriots dislike.
Causing criminal damage is an oppressive law?
No but criminalising protest is.
As is planned via the new Police Bill.
But surely wat they did was more than protest?
In effect the jury decided their protesting actions were legal.
Worth bearing in mind that the law is very clear on this as I understand it. This does not set any form of precedent. The decision was specific to this case alone. So they have not decided that criminal damage - even in an identical situation - is legal. Just that in this case they would not return a guilty verdict.
Yes, of course; there is no precedent here, and the jury's decision in this specific case does not give carte blanche to carry out criminal damage for political or any other reasons.
That's why it's a storm in a teacup and doesn't merit quite so much debate, especially as none of us know, and will ever know, what the jury discussed in coming to their verdict.
Not sure how long this will last but you can still lay Jokovic on Betfair. Assuming he is toast, pretty easy money. DAYOR.
Ooh ta!
Although see the rules about cancelling bets if he doesn’t start. I think there is risk free profit here, but you may need to cash out at the right time...
"Cashing out" means a back and a lay on the same player. Those bets should both be void according to the rules.
Hmmmm, ive just done a cashout button hit after solely lay Novax and that's done about 24 bets to cash me out.
This will get interesting.
Are you in the Oz market ?
Betting woth my UK wallet.
I don't get this, it is a cross-matched market. How can they void bets on a runner? Every bet is dependent on all the selections.
Mr Djokovic’s visa has been cancelled. Rules are rules, especially when it comes to our borders. No one is above these rules. Our strong border policies have been critical to Australia having one of the lowest death rates in the world from COVID, we are continuing to be vigilant.
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Central London has vast numbers of hospital beds in comparison?
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Does London have more hospitals per head than your average city/region? Maybe it does?
Starmer forgets his "third British value" and has to drink water to recover his composure
It matters little in itself but let it be noted that Starmer was under zero pressure here, and he was still shit. He is no Blair. He might not even be Gordon Brown. I can see him losing, valiantly, against an equally fading Boris Johnson and an equally shop-worn Nicola Sturgeon. They will all look objectionably old and boring by then
Keir Starmer strikes me as the type of Labour leader who might, like Neil Kinnock, have more of a problem when facing a female opponent. Perhaps a good reason for the Tories to choose Liz Truss.
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
London has more hospital beds per capita because of national quaternary centres, and the next hospital is much closer to divert ambulances to when overloaded. From Leicester it is a lot further to Coventry, Nottingham or Peterborough.
Apologies. I see you have already answered my question!
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
The level of vaccination is far higher outside London than inside, so I'm hoping that will mean there isn't too much of a problem in the rest of the country. London famously has about a third of people totally unjabbed, which is a figure I still find hard to believe.
I wonder if that effect is a little overstated. Aren't there a higher percentage of children in London? Also there may well be more natural immunity in London and smaller elderly population.
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
The level of vaccination is far higher outside London than inside, so I'm hoping that will mean there isn't too much of a problem in the rest of the country. London famously has about a third of people totally unjabbed, which is a figure I still find hard to believe.
I don't believe it either. I suspect it is inflated by errors caused by a mobile population, EU citizens going home, and youngsters who live primarily in London but still go home to their parents (and may be registered with s GP in their home town).
Bristol is probably where you'd want to be tried if you were a lefty vegan knitting statue botherer.
Maybe not the best place to locate a statue of a slave trader then. Perhaps they could have moved it to somewhere where white supremacists who murder children for profit are accorded the respect they're due.
God, but you're lovely when you're angry.
The whole point about Colston was that he was quite markedly less of a c--t than about 98% of his fellow slave traders in that he spent yuge sums of money on Bristol centric philanthropy rather than just being a rich c--t.
Also, are slave traders white supremacists? Do they murder children (seems a negation of their basic business model) and where's the money in child murder anyway?
I think you need to educate yourself about slavery and the slave trade.
I am 1. a professional historian and 2. the beneficiary of a reasonable chunk of a 19th century "cotton merchant's" fortune.
Thanks for the advice though.
The traditional approach to inheriting a “reasonable chunk” is to give it away
Really, Charles? How many people who you know who have inherited a reasonable chunk have given it away vs clung on to it?
I can only speak to our family traditions. But we tithe while alive and give a minimum of 80% away on death.
Well, yes, but I thought you were speaking about a "traditional approach" and that you were an historian?
I know a number of other people who have, but they aren’t public about it.
Starmer forgets his "third British value" and has to drink water to recover his composure
It matters little in itself but let it be noted that Starmer was under zero pressure here, and he was still shit. He is no Blair. He might not even be Gordon Brown. I can see him losing, valiantly, against an equally fading Boris Johnson and an equally shop-worn Nicola Sturgeon. They will all look objectionably old and boring by then
Keir Starmer strikes me as the type of Labour leader who might, like Neil Kinnock, have more of a problem when facing a female opponent. Perhaps a good reason for the Tories to choose Liz Truss.
I'm not sure Neil's fundamental problem was that Thatch happened to be a woman!!
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
The level of vaccination is far higher outside London than inside, so I'm hoping that will mean there isn't too much of a problem in the rest of the country. London famously has about a third of people totally unjabbed, which is a figure I still find hard to believe.
I don't believe it either. I suspect it is inflated by errors caused by a mobile population, EU citizens going home, and youngsters who live primarily in London but still go home to their parents (and may be registered with s GP in their home town).
Or like me, you've been registered in three different surgeries within the last year! By NIMS I count three times for London numbers and so does my wife.
Is there a law under which jurors can be prosecuted for being a bunch of knobheads?
The joy of the jury system is that the jury can acquit for whatever reason they like.
You could flip that the opposite way and that they can convict for any reason they like.
It’s not for juries to be setting laws. That’s why we have elections.
Who should be deciding if people have broken the law, if not a jury of the accused's peers?
Juries will occasionally acquit for reasons we find incomprehensible.
That's a feature, not a bug.
People who know what the law is, and have much better than average education and intelligence. What is this shit about "peers"? Who should be the judge of whether I have, let's say, MS? A specialist surgeon or 12 random wankers?
How we all cheered when good old Fred was acquitted in 1993.
Awful example in terms of your argument as West was NOT acquitted by a jury in 1993 - the trial collapsed and the jury was dismissed by the very experts to whom you refer (although not blaming them - it appears key witnesses simply wouldn't testify).
I think you misunderstand the role and value of a jury. Juries are not opining on what the law is. Largely, their role is determining who to believe, and it isn't obvious that people of "better than average education and intelligence" as you put it are better at that. I would suggest that, in fact, such people are simply more likely to believe people of better than average education and intelligence. A typical jury will have more of a range - from the very intelligent and erudite to the wide-boy who gets how sometimes fights in pubs get out of hand... which is actually pretty relevant life experience for a juror, even though I don't have it myself.
Very occasionally you get a case like the Colston Four where jurors possibly (and we don't know the debate in the jury room) feel the defendant is technically guilty but just don't want them to get a criminal record as they have sympathy, don't feel it's fair, and want to throw them a bit of mercy. As has been said, I think as long as that is rare it's a feature, not a bug. Whether or not you agree with this jury (and I myself am unsure) I don't see it as a bad thing that a dozen people just occasionally do that as it maintains a sense that the courts are considering, as well as black letter law, the fairness to the individual defendant.
OK but if they are thought to be of average intelligence why the withholding of plainly relevant evidence as I the Harper trial, because it is prejudicial? Anyone too stupid to sort the prejudicial from the probative is surely also too stupid to sort the probative from the non probative.
I am not sure how you would run a jury trial system with a modicum of efficiency without some kind of filter to limit what is presented to the jury. You do need to have some kind of rules of the game to ensure evidence presented by both defence and prosecution is sufficiently relevant rather than a question of throwing shade.
I also didn't say jurors are of average intelligence, or even that someone of average intelligence is likely to be good at that filtering process. Some are above, some below. That's averages for you. What I said was that having a range of life experiences was a good thing.
Nor did I suggest that experts don't have a role in the process. The judge in a jury trial has a huge and important role - they are ensuring the jury is properly instructed as to the law and that the "game" is played fairly. What they don't do is ultimately determine guilt or innocence. It's a false dichotomy to set the debate up as a choice between a trial with a judge only and a total free for all.
BREAKING: Italy makes COVID-19 vaccination legally mandatory for those 50 and older
Any reports of how it will be enforced? And does this not discriminate (age)? And isn’t this othering @Charles?
It’s not othering - I don’t think it is right to require mandatory vaccination but that’s a different topic.
I’ve resisted using the obvious example because people jump to the wrong conclusion based on it. I’m am not making any comparison between the potential treatment of the unvaccinated and this example. However it may serve to make the concept clearer to you: the best recent example of othering is requiring Jewish citizens of Nazi Germany to wear yellow stars, clearly marking them out as being different to most Germans. That created a class of people who were “other” and who, over time.l, faced discrimination and worse.
How is he not discriminated against here? He is not allowed to compete simply because of his vaccination status.
Not sure how long this will last but you can still lay Jokovic on Betfair. Assuming he is toast, pretty easy money. DAYOR.
Ooh ta!
Although see the rules about cancelling bets if he doesn’t start. I think there is risk free profit here, but you may need to cash out at the right time...
I've cashed out.
BF: "If a player does not start a tournament then all bets on that player will be void."
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
The only chance of a lockdown comes from an omicron type variant that creates more serious illness.
I don’t think it’s likely but it’s possible.
Seems unlikely now before we enter the summer low season anyway.
I thought it was dire, but because of the atrocious plot, acting, sets, continuity etc. However, I thought the male lead, an Englishman apparently, did a good Scottish accent. He’d been totally slated in social media, but I thought he was one of the less annoying features.
Didn't see it. Did they have Gregor Fisher as the ghillie, I wonder?
Urgh. Even the name Dun Dunbar castle ... it's like saying Fort Fort William.
When the issue of renaming American army bases named after Confederates came up, a number of people said they should rename one after - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fort
Just so you could have Fort Fort.....
There is a place called Forty Fort, which has a very boatey mcboatface vibe to it. Ahead of its time perhaps.
BREAKING: Italy makes COVID-19 vaccination legally mandatory for those 50 and older
Any reports of how it will be enforced? And does this not discriminate (age)? And isn’t this othering @Charles?
It’s not othering - I don’t think it is right to require mandatory vaccination but that’s a different topic.
I’ve resisted using the obvious example because people jump to the wrong conclusion based on it. I’m am not making any comparison between the potential treatment of the unvaccinated and this example. However it may serve to make the concept clearer to you: the best recent example of othering is requiring Jewish citizens of Nazi Germany to wear yellow stars, clearly marking them out as being different to most Germans. That created a class of people who were “other” and who, over time.l, faced discrimination and worse.
How is he not discriminated against here? He is not allowed to compete simply because of his vaccination status.
He’s an individual not a class of people
Whilst I don't think there's unfairness to Novax, he is in a class of people, being people who are opposed to vaccination.
It's arguable whether it's justifiable to discriminate on the basis of this sort of belief. I personally think it is. But he is certainly part of a "class of people".
I'd really like to see Novax at the Aussie Open just to see the reaction to him on court. Whatever the ultimate outcome, and whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, it would be fantastic theatre.
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
BREAKING: Italy makes COVID-19 vaccination legally mandatory for those 50 and older
Any reports of how it will be enforced? And does this not discriminate (age)? And isn’t this othering @Charles?
It’s not othering - I don’t think it is right to require mandatory vaccination but that’s a different topic.
I’ve resisted using the obvious example because people jump to the wrong conclusion based on it. I’m am not making any comparison between the potential treatment of the unvaccinated and this example. However it may serve to make the concept clearer to you: the best recent example of othering is requiring Jewish citizens of Nazi Germany to wear yellow stars, clearly marking them out as being different to most Germans. That created a class of people who were “other” and who, over time.l, faced discrimination and worse.
How is he not discriminated against here? He is not allowed to compete simply because of his vaccination status.
He’s an individual not a class of people
Whilst I don't think there's unfairness to Novax, he is in a class of people, being people who are opposed to vaccination.
It's arguable whether it's justifiable to discriminate on the basis of this sort of belief. I personally think it is. But he is certainly part of a "class of people".
The difference is:
Djokovic tried to enter Australia without being in possession of a valid visa. He was denied entry as everyone without a valid visa is denied entry.
@turbotubbs is identifying a segment of society - the unvaccinated - and saying they have fewer rights than everyone else.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
I'd really like to see Novax at the Aussie Open just to see the reaction to him on court. Whatever the ultimate outcome, and whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, it would be fantastic theatre.
Novax, however, thrives when the court is against him - something I’ve never seen elsewhere because players eventually wilt.
So I don’t think you would see what you are expecting.
I'd really like to see Novax at the Aussie Open just to see the reaction to him on court. Whatever the ultimate outcome, and whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, it would be fantastic theatre.
Novax, however, thrives when the court is against him - something I’ve never seen elsewhere because players eventually wilt.
So I don’t think you would see what you are expecting.
Actually, I've no expectations at all. I'm just saying I'd enjoy watching it.
Man plays other man is fine. Man plays a fiercely hostile crowd is a novelty in tennis - crowds can be partisan for a local favourite, and can tend to dislike individuals, but visceral animosity towards a particular player is really rare. It would be a hell of a spectacle.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
There’s no more lockdowns.
Vaccines work.
Covid mutating into a cold.
And both the population and the government more willing to live with covid, and ain’t going back on that.
Once attention moves away from covid/lockdowns it’s going to get very tricky for the government as the attention and pressures will be on picking up the pieces. Firstly exhausted NHS facing backlog non covid treatment. Educations need repairing. Finances to repair while Calls to cut taxes in face of credit crunch. And businesses leaders reckon U.K. struggles this year against peers thanks to Brexit.
The politics of all this will make this blog very readable through this volatile period.
"I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve globally — the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians who seek nothing more than to grow their own power — has become dangerously fragile at home"
Two things I'm picking up from twitter at the moment.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Does London have more hospitals per head than your average city/region? Maybe it does?
Also, people always fear the worst. People feared London wouldn't ride it out. Also, other regions will be older, therefore more at risk of hospitalisation. Also, bigger peaks elsewhere. NW is already higher than London and not yet peaked. But NW is made up of lots of areas which cannot easily get to each others' hospitals. If Lambeth peaks a week before Harrow, outer London hospitals can pick up the slack from inner hospitals, a bit. If Cumbria peaks a week before Greater Manchester, less easy for sharing load between trusts.
"I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve globally — the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians who seek nothing more than to grow their own power — has become dangerously fragile at home"
Did Carter fall asleep at the end of his presidency and only just wake up? Because "fighting hard" for democracy is an eccentric take on American foreign policy over the past 40-odd years.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Well I'm pleased you're now convinced.
I think ardent anti-lockdowners fear lockdown more because: a) we tend to be more convinced that lockdown is the wrong response. b) many of us have felt this way for some time, and have seen lockdowns before on what we consider scant evidence. We're therefore less convinced than average that decisions are being made rationally, so the fact that there is no case for it doesn't reassure us that government will not do it.
Not sure how long this will last but you can still lay Jokovic on Betfair. Assuming he is toast, pretty easy money. DAYOR.
Ooh ta!
Although see the rules about cancelling bets if he doesn’t start. I think there is risk free profit here, but you may need to cash out at the right time...
I've cashed out.
BF: "If a player does not start a tournament then all bets on that player will be void."
They should suspend the market. This is how the Overround Fiasco happened.
"I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve globally — the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians who seek nothing more than to grow their own power — has become dangerously fragile at home"
Did Carter fall asleep at the end of his presidency and only just wake up? Because "fighting hard" for democracy is an eccentric take on American foreign policy over the past 40-odd years.
They certainly haven't been averse to backing the odd "strongman" that's for sure.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Agree with all this. Poorly people shouldn’t be going to work. Similarly, well people shouldn’t be forced to stay at home. It’s the latter part that is causing a problem and needs to be reviewed.
"I now fear that what we have fought so hard to achieve globally — the right to free, fair elections, unhindered by strongman politicians who seek nothing more than to grow their own power — has become dangerously fragile at home"
Did Carter fall asleep at the end of his presidency and only just wake up? Because "fighting hard" for democracy is an eccentric take on American foreign policy over the past 40-odd years.
They certainly haven't been averse to backing the odd "strongman" that's for sure.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
There’s no more lockdowns.
Vaccines work.
Covid mutating into a cold.
And both the population and the government more willing to live with covid, and ain’t going back on that.
Once attention moves away from covid/lockdowns it’s going to get very tricky for the government as the attention and pressures will be on picking up the pieces. Firstly exhausted NHS facing backlog non covid treatment. Educations need repairing. Finances to repair while Calls to cut taxes in face of credit crunch. And businesses leaders reckon U.K. struggles this year against peers thanks to Brexit.
The politics of all this will make this blog very readable through this volatile period.
I remind readers of PB that I have long predicted that the April tax hike either won’t happen or will be reversed in short order, a la the 10p debacle under Brown. It’s going to be completely unpalatable to an electorate being hammered by rising prices and spiralling fuel bills.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Well I'm pleased you're now convinced.
I think ardent anti-lockdowners fear lockdown more because: a) we tend to be more convinced that lockdown is the wrong response. b) many of us have felt this way for some time, and have seen lockdowns before on what we consider scant evidence. We're therefore less convinced than average that decisions are being made rationally, so the fact that there is no case for it doesn't reassure us that government will not do it.
Which is all fair comment. I've never been pro or anti. I think I took longer to persuade, purely because I had a dose of Omicron at the nastier end of the range of possibilities. But I never was a proponent of a lockdown this time. More wait and see. Now I've waited and seen.
While we all read about the NHS strugglng with staff absences, there hasn't been much about care homes. I'm very familiar with one in Cornwall, where my uncle is staying - they have numerous staff sick and are struggling to cope. All visits have been banned. A friend's mother is in a Croydon home - it doesn't sound quite as bad there, but still very difficult - to visit there, you need to show 12 successive negative LFTs. My friend's mother has in fact had Omicron in the home, and is getting through it despite being 95, so I'm not suggesting a death wave, but I wonder whether there's a contingency plan to help homes with extra staff (from where?) to fill the gaps.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Agree with all this. Poorly people shouldn’t be going to work. Similarly, well people shouldn’t be forced to stay at home. It’s the latter part that is causing a problem and needs to be reviewed.
Hmm I think that's nuanced, if someone in our workplace tested positive they'd be told to stay away from the office or workshop no matter the official gov't line I think (Office staff can wfh, workshop can't). But perhaps this should be the decision of companies, not the gov't.
While we all read about the NHS strugglng with staff absences, there hasn't been much about care homes. I'm very familiar with one in Cornwall, where my uncle is staying - they have numerous staff sick and are struggling to cope. All visits have been banned. A friend's mother is in a Croydon home - it doesn't sound quite as bad there, but still very difficult - to visit there, you need to show 12 successive negative LFTs. My friend's mother has in fact had Omicron in the home, and is getting through it despite being 95, so I'm not suggesting a death wave, but I wonder whether there's a contingency plan to help homes with extra staff (from where?) to fill the gaps.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Well I'm pleased you're now convinced.
I think ardent anti-lockdowners fear lockdown more because: a) we tend to be more convinced that lockdown is the wrong response. b) many of us have felt this way for some time, and have seen lockdowns before on what we consider scant evidence. We're therefore less convinced than average that decisions are being made rationally, so the fact that there is no case for it doesn't reassure us that government will not do it.
Indeed. Many omicron anti-lockdowners feel guilty for backing the original lockdown, as they feel that they have legitimised them as a policy tool (rather than an extraordinary one-off). I’m not in that camp. I stand by my support for Lockdown I as we were facing a completely new threat that nobody had any idea how to deal with. Yet I understand the argument that my support then made them more likely later.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
Agree with all this. Poorly people shouldn’t be going to work. Similarly, well people shouldn’t be forced to stay at home. It’s the latter part that is causing a problem and needs to be reviewed.
Hmm I think that's nuanced, if someone in our workplace tested positive they'd be told to stay away from the office or workshop no matter the official gov't line I think (Office staff can wfh, workshop can't). But perhaps this should be the decision of companies, not the gov't.
Indeed. It’s mandating seven days even when they have a clear test that I think is excessive. France and the US have already reduced it to five days.
I think for all the Gov'ts faults they're getting it broadly right at the moment with the pandemic. I'd probably sack the JCVI but the vaccination status of 5 - 11 year olds isn't going to make or break the pandemic here.
The Colston verdicts are clearly insane but that is juries. So be it
On the plus side I can say after getting hammered in the pubs of Soho, and meeting a self selecting group of young bohemian people who go to the French House on a Wednesday in early January, that Generation Z:
1. Are not at all Woke as we know it
2. Don't give a fuck about Covid
3, Are absolutely never going to obey another lockdown, so it is pointless
Good for them. They are fun
The vast majority, never mind Gen z, will not obey another lockdown and Whitty knows this.
Doesn't really matter what Whitty thinks. But, seriously. Does anyone think there is a prospect at all of a lockdown now? (Barring summat unforeseen and catastrophic). Folk need to find summat more plausible to rail against.
You are perhaps right. The pressure now needs to be on the isolation rules, the seven-day penalty is now feared more than the disease itself.
I was urging caution even a week ago. Too early to tell. Even was called a "lockdown fanatic." I never thought the case was proven. But now I do. Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were. Am wary about 2 things now. Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least. Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
There’s no more lockdowns.
Vaccines work.
Covid mutating into a cold.
And both the population and the government more willing to live with covid, and ain’t going back on that.
Once attention moves away from covid/lockdowns it’s going to get very tricky for the government as the attention and pressures will be on picking up the pieces. Firstly exhausted NHS facing backlog non covid treatment. Educations need repairing. Finances to repair while Calls to cut taxes in face of credit crunch. And businesses leaders reckon U.K. struggles this year against peers thanks to Brexit.
The politics of all this will make this blog very readable through this volatile period.
This blog has been brilliant all evening. Satisfying and Educational often in unexpected ways. I think we have discussed art history of statues to a better understanding than the old lame stream media will come to next couple of days, and explored what makes art controversial. 👍🏻
Comments
I needed a few to get a Taiwanese visa 30 years ago. We needed HIV, hepatitis, syphilis tests yearly for renewal.
This isn't new.
I don’t think it’s likely but it’s possible.
1) London hospitals seem to be coping okay with the omicron wave
2) There appears to be concern in the rest of England that they may not be able to ride it out so easily. If that is the case it would be interesting to know why.
Can you imagine the stampede for this Colston jury? And their private lives and political positions being raked over? Whether you agree with them or not this is surely a great thing about our system.
Lockdown by 1st Feb.
lol
https://twitter.com/olafdoesstuff/status/1478344439143800832?s=21
Starmer forgets his "third British value" and has to drink water to recover his composure
It matters little in itself but let it be noted that Starmer was under zero pressure here, and he was still shit. He is no Blair. He might not even be Gordon Brown. I can see him losing, valiantly, against an equally fading Boris Johnson and an equally shop-worn Nicola Sturgeon. They will all look objectionably old and boring by then
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisCEOHopson/status/1478786979324116997
(and successive tweets by in the thread).
http://news.sky.com/story/energy-crisis-ministers-set-to-announce-help-for-soaring-bills-within-month-12509814
That's why it's a storm in a teacup and doesn't merit quite so much debate, especially as none of us know, and will ever know, what the jury discussed in coming to their verdict.
I don't get this, it is a cross-matched market. How can they void bets on a runner? Every bet is dependent on all the selections.
Mr Djokovic’s visa has been cancelled. Rules are rules, especially when it comes to our borders. No one is above these rules. Our strong border policies have been critical to Australia having one of the lowest death rates in the world from COVID, we are continuing to be vigilant.
https://twitter.com/scottmorrisonmp/status/1478848008363991049?s=21
I also didn't say jurors are of average intelligence, or even that someone of average intelligence is likely to be good at that filtering process. Some are above, some below. That's averages for you. What I said was that having a range of life experiences was a good thing.
Nor did I suggest that experts don't have a role in the process. The judge in a jury trial has a huge and important role - they are ensuring the jury is properly instructed as to the law and that the "game" is played fairly. What they don't do is ultimately determine guilt or innocence. It's a false dichotomy to set the debate up as a choice between a trial with a judge only and a total free for all.
Next autumn? Who the feck knows.
“fifteen-love”
Sigh
🙄
It's arguable whether it's justifiable to discriminate on the basis of this sort of belief. I personally think it is. But he is certainly part of a "class of people".
Djokovic tried to enter Australia without being in possession of a valid visa. He was denied entry as everyone without a valid visa is denied entry.
@turbotubbs is identifying a segment of society - the unvaccinated - and saying they have fewer rights than everyone else.
But now I do.
Yet many of the most ardent anti-lockdowners still seem to fear one. Which is strange. Because politically, it isn't going to happen. And isn't even necessary. And is too late even if it were.
Am wary about 2 things now.
Firstly, that the appetite for vaccination wanes now that omicron is proved mild. The next variant doesn't have to be. And I want this over once and for bloody all for all our sakes. That means keeping getting folk jabbed for the time being at least.
Secondly, that milder doesn't always mean mild. The virus has always been unpredictable from the beginning in its effects on different individuals. I would have needed 2 weeks off work. Mostly because I was sleeping more hours than awake for that time period. Rest of family, a cold for a few days. I wouldn't want the "get back to work you bloody skiver" narrative to leak out of the Daily Mail comments into the mainstream. A few are still pretty sick, even the triple vaxxed, even if the vast majority aren't. Glad I didn't get the full fat one.
So I don’t think you would see what you are expecting.
Time they put their money where their mouth is!
Man plays other man is fine. Man plays a fiercely hostile crowd is a novelty in tennis - crowds can be partisan for a local favourite, and can tend to dislike individuals, but visceral animosity towards a particular player is really rare. It would be a hell of a spectacle.
I'm sure he would make a far better PM. But in the bear pit cauldron that is PMQs??...
Didn't they have more than a million cases yesterday?
The injured party is deeply unsympathetic and a figure of worldwide ridicule. Let's hope that sentiment spreads.
Ain’t going to happen and Boris will have to cop the blame.
As I said before Boris is going to have to seat there and take the blame until voter reality makes his removal certain after the May Elections.
Vaccines work.
Covid mutating into a cold.
And both the population and the government more willing to live with covid, and ain’t going back on that.
Once attention moves away from covid/lockdowns it’s going to get very tricky for the government as the attention and pressures will be on picking up the pieces. Firstly exhausted NHS facing backlog non covid treatment. Educations need repairing. Finances to repair while Calls to cut taxes in face of credit crunch. And businesses leaders reckon U.K. struggles this year against peers thanks to Brexit.
The politics of all this will make this blog very readable through this volatile period.
Jimmy Carter: I Fear for Our Democracy
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/05/opinion/jan-6-jimmy-carter.html
Also, other regions will be older, therefore more at risk of hospitalisation.
Also, bigger peaks elsewhere. NW is already higher than London and not yet peaked. But NW is made up of lots of areas which cannot easily get to each others' hospitals. If Lambeth peaks a week before Harrow, outer London hospitals can pick up the slack from inner hospitals, a bit. If Cumbria peaks a week before Greater Manchester, less easy for sharing load between trusts.
Sunak will be doing a "we have listened and we have reacted" speech to HoC within weeks me thinks.
I think ardent anti-lockdowners fear lockdown more because:
a) we tend to be more convinced that lockdown is the wrong response.
b) many of us have felt this way for some time, and have seen lockdowns before on what we consider scant evidence. We're therefore less convinced than average that decisions are being made rationally, so the fact that there is no case for it doesn't reassure us that government will not do it.
https://twitter.com/brianwhelanhack/status/1478859451675385860
She is good though, I just can’t cope with Bozza’s reaction to her.
I look forward to tomorrow’s update:
The Federated States of Micronesia report more than seven new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase on record.
I've never been pro or anti. I think I took longer to persuade, purely because I had a dose of Omicron at the nastier end of the range of possibilities. But I never was a proponent of a lockdown this time. More wait and see.
Now I've waited and seen.
But perhaps this should be the decision of companies, not the gov't.