Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Or, at best, "it's better that everyone loses as long as the rich lose most than everyone gaining if the rich gain most".
Here's a challenge for the PB righties. Come up with a non-caricatured summary of left-wing politics on the basis of an assumption of good faith among lefties.
I think I made a pretty good attempt of describing the essence of Tory ideology the other day, without restoring to caricature. Can any of you do the same?
Every person deserves to enjoy a dignified, broadly equal standard of living, with those who are more able or driven paying more to support those who are less able to contribute. Each person is a blank slate and as such should not benefit from their parents' wealth accumulation or other advantages conferred by linage.
Feels pretty close.
The first sentence is a decent attempt, but it makes the second redundant.
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Whereas the Conservatives are that 1% and want to keep it that way.
The pie is big enough to give everyone a slice.
Conservatives believe in growing a bigger pie, not simply dividing up the existing pie.
Quite. And in actuality, socialism requires the worldwide pie to cease to grow. If it grows, countries who are not suffering from socialism will outgrow those who are, and it will become untenable like the Cold War. But if socialism can take hold around the world, there will be no growth anywhere, and won't that be great?
Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Or, at best, "it's better that everyone loses as long as the rich lose most than everyone gaining if the rich gain most".
Here's a challenge for the PB righties. Come up with a non-caricatured summary of left-wing politics on the basis of an assumption of good faith among lefties.
I think I made a pretty good attempt of describing the essence of Tory ideology the other day, without restoring to caricature. Can any of you do the same?
Every person deserves to enjoy a dignified, broadly equal standard of living, with those who are more able or driven paying more to support those who are less able to contribute. Each person is a blank slate and as such should not benefit from their parents' wealth accumulation or other advantages conferred by linage.
Feels pretty close.
The first sentence is a decent attempt, but it makes the second redundant.
I'd say the second is essential - a key part of modern left wing thought is the fungibility of humans - a 10th generation 60km from Mogadishu subsistence farmer is there because they never got the opportunity or support of someone who went to Eton and then did good, so that entirely explains their differences, rather than acknowledging that actually in a lot of cases, while there is a large amount of intergeneration variability, IQ is extremely heritable. That's why there's so much bleating about private school overrepresentation - if people used their common sense to see that humans are not a blank slate private school overrepresentation makes absolutely perfect sense.
Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Whereas the Conservatives are that 1% and want to keep it that way.
The pie is big enough to give everyone a slice.
Conservatives believe in growing a bigger pie, not simply dividing up the existing pie.
Quite. And in actuality, socialism requires the worldwide pie to cease to grow. If it grows, countries who are not suffering from socialism will outgrow those who are, and it will become untenable like the Cold War. But if socialism can take hold around the world, there will be no growth anywhere, and won't that be great?
Yes.
It will for the degrowth movement.
GDP growth is the problem. Not the solution.
James Meadway, cited here, is an adviser to the Green Party leader.
Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Or, at best, "it's better that everyone loses as long as the rich lose most than everyone gaining if the rich gain most".
Here's a challenge for the PB righties. Come up with a non-caricatured summary of left-wing politics on the basis of an assumption of good faith among lefties.
I think I made a pretty good attempt of describing the essence of Tory ideology the other day, without restoring to caricature. Can any of you do the same?
Every person deserves to enjoy a dignified, broadly equal standard of living, with those who are more able or driven paying more to support those who are less able to contribute. Each person is a blank slate and as such should not benefit from their parents' wealth accumulation or other advantages conferred by linage.
Feels pretty close.
The first sentence is a decent attempt, but it makes the second redundant.
I'd say the second is essential - a key part of modern left wing thought is the fungibility of humans - a 10th generation 60km from Mogadishu subsistence farmer is there because they never got the opportunity or support of someone who went to Eton and then did good, so that entirely explains their differences, rather than acknowledging that actually in a lot of cases, while there is a large amount of intergeneration variability, IQ is extremely heritable. That's why there's so much bleating about private school overrepresentation - if people used their common sense to see that humans are not a blank slate private school overrepresentation makes absolutely perfect sense.
My point being that it doesn't matter if there are inherent differences of ability between people, if the organisation of society ensured that people have a, "dignified, broadly equal standard of living."
It only appears to marry for so many at the moment because the left has rather given up on equality of outcomes, and has fallen back on meritocracy and equality of opportunity instead. In that context something like private education is akin to cheating.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
As in all these things it depends on the definition. But Scandinavian socialism, which is what I grew up with, is a combination of notable economic success with a persistent attempt to ensure that the proceeds are shared out. I've never met anyone who hated people who make money, though making it *and* opposing efforts to ensure that it's shared reasonably seems to me something to criticise. In general, I think that right-wingers too readily suspect that people on the left hate wealth.
The difficulty is if one concludes that overall wealth is only achievable by extreme inequality. Scandinavians resist that theory, on the whole successfully (IMO), by high taxation and reasonable efforts to help people on low incomes, coupled with highly competitive economies where there isn't a natural monopoly. If you make a billion pounds and pay 50% tax, fine - you're still very well off, but sharing some of the good fortune.
For much of the time that I was growing up in Denmark, none of this was sufficient for me, and I was an active communist. I've come to feel that I was wrong, and socialism is good enough and it goes as far as is practical. But I wouldn't want to live in a society with wealth distributed even more unequally than Britain, and I think there's significant scope for improvement here..
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
I hear Waddingtons is bringing a new board game out for Christmas, Cluedoless. A person has been killed but players have no information on the circumstances and cause of death. They indulge in more and more florid speculation but no facts are forthcoming so they put the game away and never play it again.
Someone, somewhere with a something. Can’t fail!
But presumably they still have to release the ethnicity of any potential suspects to prevent rioting by the usual array of wife beaters in Stone Island tops.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
If now is classed as 'simmering' then simmering is the norm; it's been that way my whole life.
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
I’m not bitter. I wasted great opportunities, and made terrible decisions
But I won’t dwell on them
I try to love life
Smiling at everyone makes almost all of them nicer people
Whilst it doesn't work all the time - circumstances can beat us down and cannot simply be ignored - doing good to feel good can really help. I recognise I am more comfortable than many, but not everyone out there is miserable and overstressed, even when their economic circumstances might make people think they would be.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
If now is classed as 'simmering' then simmering is the norm; it's been that way my whole life.
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
And one of the most privileged and safe times in history. In most ways, we have never had it so good; perhaps it's even been too good to last.
Does Socialism boil down to: "If one person is poor, everyone should be poor"?
No. "If nine people are poor and one person is wealthy, ten people could be comfortably off."
They want 99 people to be poor and one weathly, and they want to be that 1%.
Or, at best, "it's better that everyone loses as long as the rich lose most than everyone gaining if the rich gain most".
Here's a challenge for the PB righties. Come up with a non-caricatured summary of left-wing politics on the basis of an assumption of good faith among lefties.
I think I made a pretty good attempt of describing the essence of Tory ideology the other day, without restoring to caricature. Can any of you do the same?
Every person deserves to enjoy a dignified, broadly equal standard of living, with those who are more able or driven paying more to support those who are less able to contribute. Each person is a blank slate and as such should not benefit from their parents' wealth accumulation or other advantages conferred by linage.
Feels pretty close.
The first sentence is a decent attempt, but it makes the second redundant.
I'd say the second is essential - a key part of modern left wing thought is the fungibility of humans - a 10th generation 60km from Mogadishu subsistence farmer is there because they never got the opportunity or support of someone who went to Eton and then did good, so that entirely explains their differences, rather than acknowledging that actually in a lot of cases, while there is a large amount of intergeneration variability, IQ is extremely heritable. That's why there's so much bleating about private school overrepresentation - if people used their common sense to see that humans are not a blank slate private school overrepresentation makes absolutely perfect sense.
The biggest single influencing factor on life prospects is birth circumstance - to whom and where you are born.
If you find this fact unpleasant and disturbing you will support policies aimed at reducing the influence of that factor (relative to other factors). This will put you on the left.
That's my take. But of course it's based on me. On how I feel about things. It's why I am attracted to left wing politics. I can't speak for others.
Was at the Clermont last week - was OK nothing great.
Next weekend I'm staying at the Great Northern (which is the one on Kings Cross) so will report back - but we are very fairly often for drinks so the bar is very acceptable.
London hotel prices have gone up so much recently.
The cost of living crisis is real.
Early on this week I nearly fainted when I found out 30g of Beluga caviar is now £400 in Claridge's (plus service charge).
I paid £250 in 2023.
Claridge’s wanted £900 for a basic room, 35sqm. £1,250 for a balcony room.
In my mind the fanciest London hotels were in the £500 range, it’s obviously been a long time since I checked them out! Thinking back, it’s probably about 20 years!
It's causing me grief.
Back in 2023 I took my then girlfriend for a 4 night stay at Claridge's.
Current girlfriend wants the same experience but the prices are shocking, I'd be paying nearly double 3 years later.
As one of my colleagues put it, the cost must be really bad if even I baulking at the costs.
Last time I stayed in London with the missus, we were counting the pennies and stayed at a crappy Ibis next to CIty Airport and a B&B on Edgeware Rd.
This time I thought I’d push the boat out and surprise her with a stay in a fancy place, as a thank-you to her for spending the previous week with my family, but after spending the morning researching the signature hotels they’re all miles over budget.
I’ve realised that Dubai hotels are great value, there’s almost nothing above £600-700 for a king room, and the Burj-al-Arab is £1,000 for a suite (but closed for refurb at the moment).
To be honest, if you really want to treat her, perhaps go for a luxury hotel outside of London.
Pound for pound those places are much better.
One of the reasons I really don't like The Ritz is that the gentlemen are required to wear suits and ties in the public areas at all time, no exceptions.
Claridge's don't have such a ludicrous dress policy.
Which is why it is also useful to check such policies.
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
I spend a lot of time around left wingers and right wingers and in my experience right wingers tend to be at least as keen on hating as those on the left. People on the left tend to be more perplexed than anything else about people making a ton of money - they don't really understand the motivation or get why these people think they need all this money. There can certainly be a mutual lack of understanding among left wingers in the public sector and right wingers in the private sector. As a left winger in the private sector I can see both points of view. My sympathies are more on the left but I understand and admire the desire to take risks and build a business. I think it is great that there are people like this in society - we need them. But we also need nurses and teachers and taxes to pay them. Talking about hatred is a waste of time.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
The Special Military Operation is over. War has begun.
"Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia now considers the conflict a full-scale war against Ukraine and the Western countries supplying it with weapons."
Was at the Clermont last week - was OK nothing great.
Next weekend I'm staying at the Great Northern (which is the one on Kings Cross) so will report back - but we are very fairly often for drinks so the bar is very acceptable.
London hotel prices have gone up so much recently.
The cost of living crisis is real.
Early on this week I nearly fainted when I found out 30g of Beluga caviar is now £400 in Claridge's (plus service charge).
I paid £250 in 2023.
Claridge’s wanted £900 for a basic room, 35sqm. £1,250 for a balcony room.
In my mind the fanciest London hotels were in the £500 range, it’s obviously been a long time since I checked them out! Thinking back, it’s probably about 20 years!
It's causing me grief.
Back in 2023 I took my then girlfriend for a 4 night stay at Claridge's.
Current girlfriend wants the same experience but the prices are shocking, I'd be paying nearly double 3 years later.
As one of my colleagues put it, the cost must be really bad if even I baulking at the costs.
Last time I stayed in London with the missus, we were counting the pennies and stayed at a crappy Ibis next to CIty Airport and a B&B on Edgeware Rd.
This time I thought I’d push the boat out and surprise her with a stay in a fancy place, as a thank-you to her for spending the previous week with my family, but after spending the morning researching the signature hotels they’re all miles over budget.
I’ve realised that Dubai hotels are great value, there’s almost nothing above £600-700 for a king room, and the Burj-al-Arab is £1,000 for a suite (but closed for refurb at the moment).
To be honest, if you really want to treat her, perhaps go for a luxury hotel outside of London.
Pound for pound those places are much better.
One of the reasons I really don't like The Ritz is that the gentlemen are required to wear suits and ties in the public areas at all time, no exceptions.
Claridge's don't have such a ludicrous dress policy.
Which is why it is also useful to check such policies.
Was at the Clermont last week - was OK nothing great.
Next weekend I'm staying at the Great Northern (which is the one on Kings Cross) so will report back - but we are very fairly often for drinks so the bar is very acceptable.
London hotel prices have gone up so much recently.
The cost of living crisis is real.
Early on this week I nearly fainted when I found out 30g of Beluga caviar is now £400 in Claridge's (plus service charge).
I paid £250 in 2023.
Claridge’s wanted £900 for a basic room, 35sqm. £1,250 for a balcony room.
In my mind the fanciest London hotels were in the £500 range, it’s obviously been a long time since I checked them out! Thinking back, it’s probably about 20 years!
It's causing me grief.
Back in 2023 I took my then girlfriend for a 4 night stay at Claridge's.
Current girlfriend wants the same experience but the prices are shocking, I'd be paying nearly double 3 years later.
As one of my colleagues put it, the cost must be really bad if even I baulking at the costs.
Last time I stayed in London with the missus, we were counting the pennies and stayed at a crappy Ibis next to CIty Airport and a B&B on Edgeware Rd.
This time I thought I’d push the boat out and surprise her with a stay in a fancy place, as a thank-you to her for spending the previous week with my family, but after spending the morning researching the signature hotels they’re all miles over budget.
I’ve realised that Dubai hotels are great value, there’s almost nothing above £600-700 for a king room, and the Burj-al-Arab is £1,000 for a suite (but closed for refurb at the moment).
To be honest, if you really want to treat her, perhaps go for a luxury hotel outside of London.
Pound for pound those places are much better.
One of the reasons I really don't like The Ritz is that the gentlemen are required to wear suits and ties in the public areas at all time, no exceptions.
Claridge's don't have such a ludicrous dress policy.
Which is why it is also useful to check such policies.
That's exactly why I like The Ritz.
The cocktails are terrible and the bar is full of influencer type clowns.
The Corinthian employees people who can make a Stinger the right way.
Was at the Clermont last week - was OK nothing great.
Next weekend I'm staying at the Great Northern (which is the one on Kings Cross) so will report back - but we are very fairly often for drinks so the bar is very acceptable.
London hotel prices have gone up so much recently.
The cost of living crisis is real.
Early on this week I nearly fainted when I found out 30g of Beluga caviar is now £400 in Claridge's (plus service charge).
I paid £250 in 2023.
Claridge’s wanted £900 for a basic room, 35sqm. £1,250 for a balcony room.
In my mind the fanciest London hotels were in the £500 range, it’s obviously been a long time since I checked them out! Thinking back, it’s probably about 20 years!
It's causing me grief.
Back in 2023 I took my then girlfriend for a 4 night stay at Claridge's.
Current girlfriend wants the same experience but the prices are shocking, I'd be paying nearly double 3 years later.
As one of my colleagues put it, the cost must be really bad if even I baulking at the costs.
Last time I stayed in London with the missus, we were counting the pennies and stayed at a crappy Ibis next to CIty Airport and a B&B on Edgeware Rd.
This time I thought I’d push the boat out and surprise her with a stay in a fancy place, as a thank-you to her for spending the previous week with my family, but after spending the morning researching the signature hotels they’re all miles over budget.
I’ve realised that Dubai hotels are great value, there’s almost nothing above £600-700 for a king room, and the Burj-al-Arab is £1,000 for a suite (but closed for refurb at the moment).
To be honest, if you really want to treat her, perhaps go for a luxury hotel outside of London.
Pound for pound those places are much better.
One of the reasons I really don't like The Ritz is that the gentlemen are required to wear suits and ties in the public areas at all time, no exceptions.
Claridge's don't have such a ludicrous dress policy.
Which is why it is also useful to check such policies.
The Special Military Operation is over. War has begun.
"Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia now considers the conflict a full-scale war against Ukraine and the Western countries supplying it with weapons."
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Let's take that as a betting tip - back Burnham to not be PM by the end of July 2027. Can this be justified?
I say no. Leave aside the usual contingencies about illness and the Manchester omnibus which are the same for all PMs. What is left. Only three big time routes:
1) He is forced into a GE and loses 2) He voluntarily calls a GE and loses 3) He is forced by his own back benchers to resign.
(1) and (3) require a death wish from Labour MPs strong even by their standards. (1) can only happen by losing a confidence vote and (3) can only happen under similar circumstances. They are not going to rebel twice in 12 months.
(2) is unlikely in both limbs. The recent history of calling an unnecessary election in recent times is not good. He can't call a honeymoon election because, unlike Brown, he isn't going to get a honeymoon. He is straight into a deathly endgame. He may well go early if things look right but not before 2028 (odds on which have shortened recently).
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
I'll grant I have not looked at the statistics in a little while, but unless I'm shown otherwise I recall the evidence showing the covid vaccines to have done a really good job, particularly considering how quickly everything had to come together, and crucial to getting us all away from the strict lockdown measures.
Even if later analysis were to say it was less effective than my memory believes the evidence to have shown, people like Lowe going after it with terms like pureblood I think it is nonetheless a pretty solid evidence of being a crank.
The Special Military Operation is over. War has begun.
"Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia now considers the conflict a full-scale war against Ukraine and the Western countries supplying it with weapons."
Off topic: A week ago, I walked north 10 blocks to watch Kirkland's annual 4th of July Parade. As usual, it began with the best part, the kids parade:
(There are a couple of blocks of kids, often with parents or grandparents, behind those you see.)
I didn't try for a count, but would guess that the largest group in the kids parade were east Asians. There were many mixed race couples, something common in this area, and becoming more and more common in the US, as a whole.
(For those obsessed with climate change: In recent years I have notice that our summers are beginning a little earlier; in the past we often saw summer begin on July 5th. This year, and last, it began about the middle of the day on July 4th.)
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
My general advice is to try and get the best room (excluding ludicrous suites) in any given class. The best room in a 4* hotel will always be better than a basic room in a 5* hotel as hotels will always withhold services from their cheaper rooms to justify the more expensive ones.
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
I spend a lot of time around left wingers and right wingers and in my experience right wingers tend to be at least as keen on hating as those on the left. People on the left tend to be more perplexed than anything else about people making a ton of money - they don't really understand the motivation or get why these people think they need all this money. There can certainly be a mutual lack of understanding among left wingers in the public sector and right wingers in the private sector. As a left winger in the private sector I can see both points of view. My sympathies are more on the left but I understand and admire the desire to take risks and build a business. I think it is great that there are people like this in society - we need them. But we also need nurses and teachers and taxes to pay them. Talking about hatred is a waste of time.
The overwhelming majority of people in the UK, I suggest IMHO, are pragmatic social democrats, neither left nor right, who believe in the incrementalist improvement of the post WWII social democratic deal - a deal which by the standards of the day was socialist but is now centrist.
No UK politics, except its extremes, can be described or understood except in relation to that core set of well known and fairly fixed positions, which I have described so often here that I refrain from doing it again.
The disturbances of politics by Brexit, various nationalisms (Scottish, Welsh, Irish, English and British), and by the cultural issues of migration and population change are significant disruptions because they fall outside the general social democrat consensus and are therefore impossible to place within the post 1945 jigsaw. Where that will end I do not know.
But in other spheres, all real politics can only be understood as versions, variations and tinkerings with a model which is common ground.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
I'm just surprised there's a real-life person out there called "Rupert".
I thought that was a name for fictional bears only.
It's in the top 100 of boys names, so he has one upped Nigel, which apparently is a really uncommon name now with only a handful born every year.
Olivia has apparently been the most popular girls name for a decade, yet I've never come across one so it must really have risen from nowhere after my generation. You'd think it would be getting so common people would start sliding from it at this point.
My own name has gone from a top 20 name to outside the top 600, for shame.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
As in all these things it depends on the definition. But Scandinavian socialism, which is what I grew up with, is a combination of notable economic success with a persistent attempt to ensure that the proceeds are shared out. I've never met anyone who hated people who make money, though making it *and* opposing efforts to ensure that it's shared reasonably seems to me something to criticise. In general, I think that right-wingers too readily suspect that people on the left hate wealth.
The difficulty is if one concludes that overall wealth is only achievable by extreme inequality. Scandinavians resist that theory, on the whole successfully (IMO), by high taxation and reasonable efforts to help people on low incomes, coupled with highly competitive economies where there isn't a natural monopoly. If you make a billion pounds and pay 50% tax, fine - you're still very well off, but sharing some of the good fortune.
For much of the time that I was growing up in Denmark, none of this was sufficient for me, and I was an active communist. I've come to feel that I was wrong, and socialism is good enough and it goes as far as is practical. But I wouldn't want to live in a society with wealth distributed even more unequally than Britain, and I think there's significant scope for improvement here..
Very well put Nick. Have you ever thought of going into politics?
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
If now is classed as 'simmering' then simmering is the norm; it's been that way my whole life.
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
Simmering is a very useful word. You can say a country is simmering under a leadership you disdain and no-one needs to be actually rioting.
Was at the Clermont last week - was OK nothing great.
Next weekend I'm staying at the Great Northern (which is the one on Kings Cross) so will report back - but we are very fairly often for drinks so the bar is very acceptable.
London hotel prices have gone up so much recently.
The cost of living crisis is real.
Early on this week I nearly fainted when I found out 30g of Beluga caviar is now £400 in Claridge's (plus service charge).
I paid £250 in 2023.
Claridge’s wanted £900 for a basic room, 35sqm. £1,250 for a balcony room.
In my mind the fanciest London hotels were in the £500 range, it’s obviously been a long time since I checked them out! Thinking back, it’s probably about 20 years!
It's causing me grief.
Back in 2023 I took my then girlfriend for a 4 night stay at Claridge's.
Current girlfriend wants the same experience but the prices are shocking, I'd be paying nearly double 3 years later.
As one of my colleagues put it, the cost must be really bad if even I baulking at the costs.
Last time I stayed in London with the missus, we were counting the pennies and stayed at a crappy Ibis next to CIty Airport and a B&B on Edgeware Rd.
This time I thought I’d push the boat out and surprise her with a stay in a fancy place, as a thank-you to her for spending the previous week with my family, but after spending the morning researching the signature hotels they’re all miles over budget.
I’ve realised that Dubai hotels are great value, there’s almost nothing above £600-700 for a king room, and the Burj-al-Arab is £1,000 for a suite (but closed for refurb at the moment).
To be honest, if you really want to treat her, perhaps go for a luxury hotel outside of London.
Pound for pound those places are much better.
One of the reasons I really don't like The Ritz is that the gentlemen are required to wear suits and ties in the public areas at all time, no exceptions.
Claridge's don't have such a ludicrous dress policy.
Which is why it is also useful to check such policies.
That's exactly why I like The Ritz.
In 33 degree weather it is a ludicrous policy.
At my (state, but grammar) school, such temperatures would lead to a relaxation:
Socialism involves wealth creation - without the state taking risk. As a result the growth is far more anaemic.
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
...I grew up...with a persistent attempt to ensure that the proceeds are shared out...
We are aware of your determination to share the proceeds sir, and I am also sure that we will never forget the specific case of sharing you posted.
😄😄😄😄
Mods, can we ensure that Nick's comment for the ages is preserved for future generations? Lest We Forget.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
It's not a question of faith, it's a question of statistics. We can see the numbers who are hospitalised or die, and compare with the numbers for the same before the vaccines.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
I'm just surprised there's a real-life person out there called "Rupert".
I thought that was a name for fictional bears only.
It's in the top 100 of boys names, so he has one upped Nigel, which apparently is a really uncommon name now with only a handful born every year.
Olivia has apparently been the most popular girls name for a decade, yet I've never come across one so it must really have risen from nowhere after my generation. You'd think it would be getting so common people would start sliding from it at this point.
My own name has gone from a top 20 name to outside the top 600, for shame.
I am somewhat surprised that kle4 made the top 20 at any time.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
If now is classed as 'simmering' then simmering is the norm; it's been that way my whole life.
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
Simmering is a very useful word. You can say a country is simmering under a leadership you disdain and no-one needs to be actually rioting.
Yes, the absence of obvious disruption not getting in the way of things clearly being on the brink. Ok, things can be muted without being happy, but come on.
I have not heard about the imminent civil-war from my most Restorey acquaintance for awhile though, so I think even they are a bit disappointed at the moment.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
Ivermectin is a brilliant anti-parastic drug, and has had massive effects on oncocerciasis and filiarisis in Africa. MSD gave it out for free in countries that had an organised public health programme.
In vivo aainst viruses it is as ineffective, or even more so, than antibiotics. It is not a panacea.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
Ivermectin is a brilliant anti-parastic drug, and has had massive effects on oncocerciasis and filiarisis in Africa. MSD gave it out for free in countries that had an organised public health programme.
In vivo aainst viruses it is as ineffective, or even more so, than antibiotics. It is not a panacea.
Yes, the description was probably unfair, but it was in the clear context of its use as treatment for Covid.
Burnham will do well to survive the year. He has no principles, no clue about how he managed do well in Manchester (as evidenced by his recent housing noises), and is taking over a country that is already simmering. The only really big call is chancellor - if it's Miliband then I advise finding your local Argentinian/Saffer and take some tips on transitioning to the third world.
Haha very good. This is a keeper.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
There's been quite frequent civil disturbance while Starmer has been PM in relation to Southport, Refugee hotels, and the Novak murder.
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
If now is classed as 'simmering' then simmering is the norm; it's been that way my whole life.
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
Simmering is a very useful word. You can say a country is simmering under a leadership you disdain and no-one needs to be actually rioting.
Yes, the absence of obvious disruption not getting in the way of things clearly being on the brink. Ok, things can be muted without being happy, but come on.
I have not heard about the imminent civil-war from my most Restorey acquaintance for awhile though, so I think even they are a bit disappointed at the moment.
But in the two years of Starmer's PMship we have seen frequent civil disturbance on the streets. Very obvious disruption. So much so that we had the criminal justice system deploy the standard riot response of rapid trial and harsh sentences.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
I'm just surprised there's a real-life person out there called "Rupert".
I thought that was a name for fictional bears only.
It's in the top 100 of boys names, so he has one upped Nigel, which apparently is a really uncommon name now with only a handful born every year.
Olivia has apparently been the most popular girls name for a decade, yet I've never come across one so it must really have risen from nowhere after my generation. You'd think it would be getting so common people would start sliding from it at this point.
My own name has gone from a top 20 name to outside the top 600, for shame.
When I ws young, George and Harry were the generation above. Now they are the generation below.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Actually we do know. Some US States had much lower vaccination rates than others. They also had much higher covid mortality.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
The clinical trials that were conducted on the vaccines before they were rolled out widely are direct evidence of their very high levels of efficacy. Not modelling counterfactuals.
It's very hard to take you seriously on anything when you deploy such an attitude to evidence in the case of vaccines.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
It's not a question of faith, it's a question of statistics. We can see the numbers who are hospitalised or die, and compare with the numbers for the same before the vaccines.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
Sure, but as the pandemic progressed, those numbers would have fallen naturally, even without any form of medical intervention - this happens in all epidemics. And with different methods (not ivermectin) in another universe, they might have fallen faster. They might not have. Perhaps the vaccines were the best of all possible worlds. Perhaps they were not. We can't really know.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Rubbish
We saw, repeatedly, around the world, that death rates and hospitalisations collapsed in the vaccinated groups. And that during the vaccine roll out, the unvaccinated continued to suffer death and serious illness as before. And when their groups were vaccinated in turn, their death and illness rates collapsed as well. In perfect sequence.
A similar pattern was observed in transmission of the disease.
Take the vaccine and your chance of death or serious illness collapsed. Don’t take it and it didn’t.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
We can see what the numbers were before we used them and what the numbers were after we used them - what would you regard as evidence?
Presumably you think we have some way of telling, as the way you put it there would seem to suggest we are literally blind on the efficacy of, well, any treatment for anything, because by using them we cannot then estimate what it would have been like without them.
I don't know why the efficacy of vaccines as a concept seems to be on the wane, though I understand why with Covid specifically it has become very politicised, but if we can't tell if they work because we can't know what would happen if we didn't have them, what exactly is the answer - never use any for anything? Surely that is the argument if we cannot know if they work because it is based on 'counterfactuals'.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Well, they tested the vaccines. And a lot fewer people died after receiving the vaccines than after receiving a placebo.
From memory there are two Premier Inns near Waterloo Station. Premier Inn London Waterloo is around 250per night, but it doesn't have anything downstairs except a receptionist. The one on or near the old County Hall site is I think posher. Both are within walking distance of the NFT/BFI, the National Theatre, and the Houses of Parliament.
As I said, this is from memory. If you want something posher or are feeling flush, I'd go for the Malmaison chain which tend to be more posh. Above that I don't really go and others can better advise
Don't use the Leonardo's chain. They don't know how to do hotels.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Well, they tested the vaccines. And a lot fewer people died after receiving the vaccines than after receiving a placebo.
I'm deeply confused by the idea that it must be a matter of faith whether it works. Covid is around, we use vaccines, and we can then see how that looks versus areas that weren't using it at the time and see if things were better. What am I missing?
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
It's not a question of faith, it's a question of statistics. We can see the numbers who are hospitalised or die, and compare with the numbers for the same before the vaccines.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
Sure, but as the pandemic progressed, those numbers would have fallen naturally, even without any form of medical intervention - this happens in all epidemics. And with different methods (not ivermectin) in another universe, they might have fallen faster. They might not have. Perhaps the vaccines were the best of all possible worlds. Perhaps they were not. We can't really know.
So what's the answer if we get another pandemic - never use a vaccine because no proof they would be better than doing nothing? Use them even though apparently it is impossible to know if it will work?
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
It's not a question of faith, it's a question of statistics. We can see the numbers who are hospitalised or die, and compare with the numbers for the same before the vaccines.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
Sure, but as the pandemic progressed, those numbers would have fallen naturally, even without any form of medical intervention - this happens in all epidemics. And with different methods (not ivermectin) in another universe, they might have fallen faster. They might not have. Perhaps the vaccines were the best of all possible worlds. Perhaps they were not. We can't really know.
You're completely ignoring all the evidence in the Covid vaccines that exists.
And your story doesn't even fit the broad-brush epidemiological pattern of the Covid pandemic. There was no evidence that the second wave was any less deadly than the first, except insofar as treatment protocols had improved, but that made a much smaller difference to patient outcomes than the vaccines did. By orders of magnitude.
That said, some commentators are reacting hysterically to any criticism as if Ann Widdecombe was the Queen Mother.
Right wing shitbags get a bit snowflake-y and abandon their free speech principles whenever anybody slags off their shaheeds. That c-nt Charlie Kirk, etc.
I sense that some on the right are hoping for their own Jo Cox event here. ID of the perpetrator permitting.
Speaking of the identity of the perpetrator, should the police not be forthcoming on what they are now looking for? Assuming they now have nothing to go on (this could be untrue; they could have a very strong lead), they have not been very candid that the suspect could now be literally anyone.
Possibly. But in general I don't think the police have a duty to keep us informed blow by blow on a murder investigation. For myself I'm quite content to hear nothing for a while as they work on it. The most important thing is they get a result. It'd be dreadful if it were to go unsolved.
It is not a question of a blow by blow account, it is a question of public safety. There is (again presumably) a dangerous killer on the loose.
I’m spending a weekend down in Totnes with friends before boarding the Santander ferry, so if anyone’s in in very real danger from this killer at large it’s me and the family (and local PBer @MarqueeMark i assume). Drove through Newton Abbot on the way here. I’ll keep a beady eye out.
You don't know what to keep an eye out for, this is the issue.
11 murders a week, and you've not made this complaint about any of them before now.
I haven't known about or discussed any of those other cases. If you care to bring the details of such a case to my attention, I will opine. We are discussing this case.
You are complaining there is a public safety issue because the police haven’t told us enough. You seem unbothered by the public safety issues around 11 other cases a week. What makes the public safety issue so special in this case?
My apologies, Taz, because I think you are referring to my comments and I didn’t mean he wasn’t a lobbyist. I was merely quibbling with the wording that he was a lobbyist for the organisation he co-founded. He is a lobbyist. He lobbies through the activities of this organisation, rather than there’s an organisation and it hires him to lobby for them. IYSWIM.
Someone was gasing on about the TNT equivalence of battery storage systems.
Well, the average petrol station has on its premises the equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon’ worth of TNT - as measured in the raw energy equivalence.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Rubbish
We saw, repeatedly, around the world, that death rates and hospitalisations collapsed in the vaccinated groups. And that during the vaccine roll out, the unvaccinated continued to suffer death and serious illness as before. And when their groups were vaccinated in turn, their death and illness rates collapsed as well. In perfect sequence.
A similar pattern was observed in transmission of the disease.
Take the vaccine and your chance of death or serious illness collapsed. Don’t take it and it didn’t.
Given that pre-vaccine the chance of a 75± year old (highest risk cohort) dying if infected was 1 in 138, but the no covid chance of dying anyway when you're that age is 1 in 23, it seems somewhat of a modest collapse.
Someone was gasing on about the TNT equivalence of battery storage systems.
Well, the average petrol station has on its premises the equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon’ worth of TNT - as measured in the raw energy equivalence.
In fairness, if a petrol station explodes you will certainly notice it.
That said, some commentators are reacting hysterically to any criticism as if Ann Widdecombe was the Queen Mother.
Right wing shitbags get a bit snowflake-y and abandon their free speech principles whenever anybody slags off their shaheeds. That c-nt Charlie Kirk, etc.
I sense that some on the right are hoping for their own Jo Cox event here. ID of the perpetrator permitting.
Speaking of the identity of the perpetrator, should the police not be forthcoming on what they are now looking for? Assuming they now have nothing to go on (this could be untrue; they could have a very strong lead), they have not been very candid that the suspect could now be literally anyone.
Possibly. But in general I don't think the police have a duty to keep us informed blow by blow on a murder investigation. For myself I'm quite content to hear nothing for a while as they work on it. The most important thing is they get a result. It'd be dreadful if it were to go unsolved.
It is not a question of a blow by blow account, it is a question of public safety. There is (again presumably) a dangerous killer on the loose.
I’m spending a weekend down in Totnes with friends before boarding the Santander ferry, so if anyone’s in in very real danger from this killer at large it’s me and the family (and local PBer @MarqueeMark i assume). Drove through Newton Abbot on the way here. I’ll keep a beady eye out.
You don't know what to keep an eye out for, this is the issue.
11 murders a week, and you've not made this complaint about any of them before now.
I haven't known about or discussed any of those other cases. If you care to bring the details of such a case to my attention, I will opine. We are discussing this case.
You are complaining there is a public safety issue because the police haven’t told us enough. You seem unbothered by the public safety issues around 11 other cases a week. What makes the public safety issue so special in this case?
I do not seem anything of the kind. We are discussing this case. I don't know of any similar issues in other cases, because I don't know the cases. I don't think this is the killer point you believe it to be, but oh well.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
I'm just surprised there's a real-life person out there called "Rupert".
I thought that was a name for fictional bears only.
It's in the top 100 of boys names, so he has one upped Nigel, which apparently is a really uncommon name now with only a handful born every year.
Olivia has apparently been the most popular girls name for a decade, yet I've never come across one so it must really have risen from nowhere after my generation. You'd think it would be getting so common people would start sliding from it at this point.
My own name has gone from a top 20 name to outside the top 600, for shame.
When I ws young, George and Harry were the generation above. Now they are the generation below.
I don't know any in my own age group.
Can think of only one Tom and one Joe in my cohort. There aren't many in Primary now. In between? A fair few.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Rubbish
We saw, repeatedly, around the world, that death rates and hospitalisations collapsed in the vaccinated groups. And that during the vaccine roll out, the unvaccinated continued to suffer death and serious illness as before. And when their groups were vaccinated in turn, their death and illness rates collapsed as well. In perfect sequence.
A similar pattern was observed in transmission of the disease.
Take the vaccine and your chance of death or serious illness collapsed. Don’t take it and it didn’t.
Given that pre-vaccine the chance of a 75± year old (highest risk cohort) dying if infected was 1 in 138, but the no covid chance of dying anyway when you're that age is 1 in 23, it seems somewhat of a modest collapse.
During the pandemic the average age of a person dying of Covid was regularly given as ~80, and now you're giving a 75 year old as the highest risk cohort (and even then I suspect your number is rubbish. Lots of people were producing rubbish low numbers by inflating the number of estimated infections.)
I've, rather sadly (like I'm a saddo, rather than I'm upset) noticed that I have more than a thousand more likes than comments for the first time
Will likes be preserved on WordPress?
I think that @OnlyLivingBoy would be the biggest loser from likes being forgotten
OnlyLivingBoy writes well, is clearly a smart guy, and makes punchy points. He also espouses views that match the PB consensus to the extent that the Venn diagram is basically a circle. That's a good combination.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
Well, they tested the vaccines. And a lot fewer people died after receiving the vaccines than after receiving a placebo.
I'm deeply confused by the idea that it must be a matter of faith whether it works. Covid is around, we use vaccines, and we can then see how that looks versus areas that weren't using it at the time and see if things were better. What am I missing?
You're missing the fact that anti-vaxxers are fucking nutters.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
The COVID vaccines crushed the death rates to nothing, as they did with serious illness & hospitalisation.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
I have not said anything about side effects.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
We can see what the numbers were before we used them and what the numbers were after we used them - what would you regard as evidence?
Presumably you think we have some way of telling, as the way you put it there would seem to suggest we are literally blind on the efficacy of, well, any treatment for anything, because by using them we cannot then estimate what it would have been like without them.
I don't know why the efficacy of vaccines as a concept seems to be on the wane, though I understand why with Covid specifically it has become very politicised, but if we can't tell if they work because we can't know what would happen if we didn't have them, what exactly is the answer - never use any for anything? Surely that is the argument if we cannot know if they work because it is based on 'counterfactuals'.
Trust in vaccines is eroding because it drives emotions, which in turn makes already obscenely wealthy billionaires more billions at our expense through selling advertising. Yes, it is that ridiculous.
I hadn't realised that in addition to being a racist and, at best, incredibly insensitive about victims of gun massacres, Lowe is also an anti-vaxxer moron, but to a degree these things do seem to go together - everythingism, right wing edition.
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
That said, anyone who describes Ivermectin as “horse de-wormer”, rather than an invention that earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine and has likely saved millions of lives, is probably best ignored.
I know nothing about Ivermectin (though oddly I was once accused here of having been an Ivermectin fan during Covid), but it wouldn't be the first medicine that originally had another quite different application, and that feels like a rather heavy-handed way to imply crankiness.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
It's not a question of faith, it's a question of statistics. We can see the numbers who are hospitalised or die, and compare with the numbers for the same before the vaccines.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
Sure, but as the pandemic progressed, those numbers would have fallen naturally, even without any form of medical intervention - this happens in all epidemics. And with different methods (not ivermectin) in another universe, they might have fallen faster. They might not have. Perhaps the vaccines were the best of all possible worlds. Perhaps they were not. We can't really know.
Sorry but this is utter garbage.
According to.the ONS in September of 2021, amongst those who had received the Covid vaccine more than 21 days prior to death, covid only accounted for 0.8% of total deaths. Amongst the same cohort who had not received the covid vaccine, deaths from covid accounted for 37.4% of total deaths.
Vaccination worked. Anti vaxxers are ill informed morons.
Someone was gasing on about the TNT equivalence of battery storage systems.
Well, the average petrol station has on its premises the equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon’ worth of TNT - as measured in the raw energy equivalence.
But that's different! Petrol isn't dangerous because, ugh... reasons.
Someone was gasing on about the TNT equivalence of battery storage systems.
Well, the average petrol station has on its premises the equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon’ worth of TNT - as measured in the raw energy equivalence.
But that's different! Petrol isn't dangerous because, ugh... reasons.
I wouldn’t want one of them close to where I live either
Comments
England 111/1 after 10 overs.
Three EU, and three non EU, European countries in the quarter finals; it would be so cool to end up with two of each in the semis
Conservatism encourages people to take risks - and take a greater personal share of the rewards for that risk. Where it has arguably gone wrong is in protecting the risk takers from the consequences of getting it wrong - see the water companies for a prime example. Take risks, get great rewards - but if it goes tits up, tough.
Under socialism, nobody takes risks. They don't need protecting from failure. But conseqently there isn't much pie to share around.
(I do think that many on the left have a deep hatred - yes as strong as that - of people who make money. It is also an attitude that permeates the civil service.
The UK is not a sensible place to build businesses to take risks. Or if you do find a window and succeed - sell. As we see. Success is fleeting before it gets whisked abroad.)
But it is far too hot to discuss politics, just watch sports and enjoy the aircon.
It will for the degrowth movement.
GDP growth is the problem. Not the solution.
James Meadway, cited here, is an adviser to the Green Party leader.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/27/what-is-degrowth-can-it-save-planet
It’s just moving a line on a spreadsheet
It’s phenomenal
It only appears to marry for so many at the moment because the left has rather given up on equality of outcomes, and has fallen back on meritocracy and equality of opportunity instead. In that context something like private education is akin to cheating.
I'll file it along with the posts that explained why the IMF would be bailing out Labour by now.
Regarding the country already simmering, that's presumably evidenced by the nightly riots we see in our major cities, just like in 1981, 1985, 1991, 1995, 2001, or 2011 eh?
I wouldn't say simmering was an unfair description.
The difficulty is if one concludes that overall wealth is only achievable by extreme inequality. Scandinavians resist that theory, on the whole successfully (IMO), by high taxation and reasonable efforts to help people on low incomes, coupled with highly competitive economies where there isn't a natural monopoly. If you make a billion pounds and pay 50% tax, fine - you're still very well off, but sharing some of the good fortune.
For much of the time that I was growing up in Denmark, none of this was sufficient for me, and I was an active communist. I've come to feel that I was wrong, and socialism is good enough and it goes as far as is practical. But I wouldn't want to live in a society with wealth distributed even more unequally than Britain, and I think there's significant scope for improvement here..
This slip of the tongue on one murder vs one mass shooting seems less significant than Lowe describing himself as a “pureblood” because he refused the Covid vaccine.
He went on to say horse de-wormer Ivermectin was “just as effective” as the vaccine.
https://nitter.poast.org/tomhfh/status/2075506010937045335#m
It's llke he exists purely to make people realise that Farage is not as bad by comparison.
I’m a postie
Social mobility works both ways
I’m not bitter. I wasted great opportunities, and made terrible decisions
But I won’t dwell on them
I try to love life
Smiling at everyone makes almost all of them nicer people
Meanwhile we live in one of the most privileged, safe, and contented countries in the world.
If you find this fact unpleasant and disturbing you will support policies aimed at reducing the influence of that factor (relative to other factors). This will put you on the left.
That's my take. But of course it's based on me. On how I feel about things. It's why I am attracted to left wing politics. I can't speak for others.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2015/press-release/[Ivermectin/
Jurgen Klopp has reached an agreement in principle to become the new head coach of Germany's men's national team.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ced44061g8qo
The Corinthian employees people who can make a Stinger the right way.
But mobilisation is fantastically unpopular. About three-quarters are opposed.
Truly the most awful rendition of Flower of Scotland I have ever heard.
And noticeable how the Pretoria crowd suddenly starts belting the Die Stem part of the anthem.
I am also not sure we can say too much for the effectiveness of the covid vaccines. Everyone knows people who have had it (yes, I know it's not supposed to make you immune) and had it badly, despite being boosted up to the nines. We can say they'd have had it even worse, but that is largely a question of faith.
https://www.thegoodenough.co.uk/rooms-suites/suites
I say no. Leave aside the usual contingencies about illness and the Manchester omnibus which are the same for all PMs. What is left. Only three big time routes:
1) He is forced into a GE and loses
2) He voluntarily calls a GE and loses
3) He is forced by his own back benchers to resign.
(1) and (3) require a death wish from Labour MPs strong even by their standards. (1) can only happen by losing a confidence vote and (3) can only happen under similar circumstances. They are not going to rebel twice in 12 months.
(2) is unlikely in both limbs. The recent history of calling an unnecessary election in recent times is not good. He can't call a honeymoon election because, unlike Brown, he isn't going to get a honeymoon. He is straight into a deathly endgame. He may well go early if things look right but not before 2028 (odds on which have shortened recently).
So, No.
Even if later analysis were to say it was less effective than my memory believes the evidence to have shown, people like Lowe going after it with terms like pureblood I think it is nonetheless a pretty solid evidence of being a crank.
(There are a couple of blocks of kids, often with parents or grandparents, behind those you see.)
I didn't try for a count, but would guess that the largest group in the kids parade were east Asians. There were many mixed race couples, something common in this area, and becoming more and more common in the US, as a whole.
(For those obsessed with climate change: In recent years I have notice that our summers are beginning a little earlier; in the past we often saw summer begin on July 5th. This year, and last, it began about the middle of the day on July 4th.)
I thought that was a name for fictional bears only.
This is extremely clear, both from the medical trials and the data from actual usage.
The side effects of the vaccines have also been tracked, in detailed, published data and are in line with other vaccinations.
So away with your “question of faith” stuff.
No UK politics, except its extremes, can be described or understood except in relation to that core set of well known and fairly fixed positions, which I have described so often here that I refrain from doing it again.
The disturbances of politics by Brexit, various nationalisms (Scottish, Welsh, Irish, English and British), and by the cultural issues of migration and population change are significant disruptions because they fall outside the general social democrat consensus and are therefore impossible to place within the post 1945 jigsaw. Where that will end I do not know.
But in other spheres, all real politics can only be understood as versions, variations and tinkerings with a model which is common ground.
Olivia has apparently been the most popular girls name for a decade, yet I've never come across one so it must really have risen from nowhere after my generation. You'd think it would be getting so common people would start sliding from it at this point.
My own name has gone from a top 20 name to outside the top 600, for shame.
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/shirtsleeve-order_n
😄😄😄😄
Mods, can we ensure that Nick's comment for the ages is preserved for future generations? Lest We Forget.
The comparison is pretty compelling in favour of the vaccines.
I have not heard about the imminent civil-war from my most Restorey acquaintance for awhile though, so I think even they are a bit disappointed at the moment.
Regarding the efficacy of vaccines, the studies there are based on modelling non-existent counterfactuals. We had the vaccines. We cannot know with any certainty what would have happened in a world where we didn't.
In vivo aainst viruses it is as ineffective, or even more so, than antibiotics. It is not a panacea.
I don't know any in my own age group.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9933209/
It's very hard to take you seriously on anything when you deploy such an attitude to evidence in the case of vaccines.
We saw, repeatedly, around the world, that death rates and hospitalisations collapsed in the vaccinated groups. And that during the vaccine roll out, the unvaccinated continued to suffer death and serious illness as before. And when their groups were vaccinated in turn, their death and illness rates collapsed as well. In perfect sequence.
A similar pattern was observed in transmission of the disease.
Take the vaccine and your chance of death or serious illness collapsed. Don’t take it and it didn’t.
Presumably you think we have some way of telling, as the way you put it there would seem to suggest we are literally blind on the efficacy of, well, any treatment for anything, because by using them we cannot then estimate what it would have been like without them.
I don't know why the efficacy of vaccines as a concept seems to be on the wane, though I understand why with Covid specifically it has become very politicised, but if we can't tell if they work because we can't know what would happen if we didn't have them, what exactly is the answer - never use any for anything? Surely that is the argument if we cannot know if they work because it is based on 'counterfactuals'.
Will likes be preserved on WordPress?
I think that @OnlyLivingBoy would be the biggest loser from likes being forgotten
From memory there are two Premier Inns near Waterloo Station. Premier Inn London Waterloo is around 250per night, but it doesn't have anything downstairs except a receptionist. The one on or near the old County Hall site is I think posher. Both are within walking distance of the NFT/BFI, the National Theatre, and the Houses of Parliament.
As I said, this is from memory. If you want something posher or are feeling flush, I'd go for the Malmaison chain which tend to be more posh. Above that I don't really go and others can better advise
Don't use the Leonardo's chain. They don't know how to do hotels.
And your story doesn't even fit the broad-brush epidemiological pattern of the Covid pandemic. There was no evidence that the second wave was any less deadly than the first, except insofar as treatment protocols had improved, but that made a much smaller difference to patient outcomes than the vaccines did. By orders of magnitude.
Someone was gasing on about the TNT equivalence of battery storage systems.
Well, the average petrol station has on its premises the equivalent of a tactical nuclear weapon’ worth of TNT - as measured in the raw energy equivalence.
OLB deserves the acclamation
I'm now seeking counselling.
(Still, Mrs P. says she still likes me.)
There aren't many in Primary now.
In between? A fair few.
According to.the ONS in September of 2021, amongst those who had received the Covid vaccine more than 21 days prior to death, covid only accounted for 0.8% of total deaths. Amongst the same cohort who had not received the covid vaccine, deaths from covid accounted for 37.4% of total deaths.
Vaccination worked. Anti vaxxers are ill informed morons.
Never been, never will. Had a walk and brunch in Seaburn instead
There’s a banner from that well known North East mining outfit, Palestinian Solidarity. 🙄
https://x.com/subversiveforce/status/2075915294166364177?s=61