politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Yet another Dem TV Debate and this time Bernie’s expected to be in the firing line
Ahead of Saturday’s South Carolina primary we have yet another TV debate between the main contenders. This takes place in Charleston and will start at 1am GMT lasting two hours.
FPT - the Scottish Government appears to be running adverts on the London Underground for people to move to Scotland under the slogan “Scotland is Now”.
It’s kind of weird the Scottish Government wants to attract mainly English immigrants to move into North Britain. Maybe Sturgeon secretly wants us to all move up there so we can vote down independence.
I saw one of those adverts this morning. Perhaps the calculation is that London remainers would vote for independence to get back into the EU.
Move to Scotland and have a life out of the rat race, you can afford a lovely house and a great life.
It rains too much for my liking. The East Midlands would be my destination of choice should I decide I’ve had enough of Surrey.
Sky paper reviewer on covid -19 says it is very exciting and repeats it
People have died, thousands suffering, and real economic damage is possible
And its 'exciting'. She needs to have more respect
Indeed. The fatality rate is about 2% in the most heavily infected areas in China, with another 5% in serious or critical cases.
The UK has only 4048 adult critical care beds, of which there were exactly 1000 available at the last reporting day (near the end of December 2019) - fewer than a quarter.
As soon as intensive care facilities become full, you can expect people who would have recovered from the virus, to die. You can also expect other people who currently form part of the 3000 now in intensive care but who wouldn't be able to get a bed because of all the Covid-19 cases, to die as well.
I'd like to remind you all that I have as many pledged delegates as Michael Bloomberg.
And you will after South Carolina too. Why is he getting to play if he's not putting himself up for the vote?
People can vote in many other states today beyond South Carolina - 2m+ have done so in California alone (albeit that 800k+ are in the GOP primaries). They can't, as it happens, use early voting in S Carolina.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
This really should be close to a head to head by now and a binary choice. That field is ridiculous.
It's quite difficult doing comparisons with previous races because sometimes no-hope candidates stayed in well after they should have but I can't find any precedent for seven serious candidates in the race after 40% of the delegates have been determined.
I don't think it should have whittled down to just two candidates but the attrition rate so far has been exceptionally low, despite an exceptionally wide field. This close to Super Tuesday, for an open nomination, I think you'd normally be looking at about 3-4 serious candidates.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
Has there ever been an outbreak of such a scale of anything? That’s probably about 1/2 a billion deaths when it leaks into areas with little to no healthcare.
If that’s aimed at me, as against SeanT, you can fucking do one.
I think I am allowed one big fat fuck you post. I started my Coronavirus fear fest, on here, about two weeks ago. I said from the start this was going to be big and it was going to be scary. I was roundly mocked, ridiculed, Pooh-poohed, called a big poncey bedwetter, and much else.
I responded by calmly and correctly pointing out that you autistic pb twats were exhibiting Normalcy Bias, indeed a classic case of it.
For that I was roundly mocked, abused, belittled, blah blah blah
Which is all fair enough. That’s PB. You dish it out, you take it.
But now it’s my turn to dish it out to you trainspotters.
I was right. You were all wrong. Very, very wrong.
One of the things that slightly concerns me about coronavirus is the way that a lot of people/politicians who could have been relied upon until very recently to caution against any sort of panic that might make matters worse are not necessarily taking that approach today. A possible reason for this is that they themselves have been unsettled by recent political events such as Brexit, Trump, Putin, Syria, etc. I hope I'm wrong about this though.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
Has there ever been an outbreak of such a scale of anything? That’s probably about 1/2 a billion deaths when it leaks into areas with little to no healthcare.
The last really big pandemic was the Spanish Flu one about 100 years ago. Sources vary but a central figure suggests that it killed about 40-50m people (or about 2-2.5% of the then global population).
And that wealth tax... while I personally am a fan of wealth taxes (albeit charged at a very low level), it's not... ahhh... much more popular than the Coronavirus.
One of the things that slightly concerns me about coronavirus is the way that a lot of people/politicians who could have been relied upon until very recently to caution against any sort of panic that might make matters worse are not necessarily taking that approach today. A possible reason for this is that they themselves have been unsettled by recent political events such as Brexit, Trump, Putin, Syria, etc. I hope I'm wrong about this though.
Not panic, but severe closedowns and quarantine are simply the most effective control methods. They also spread the duration of the pandemic to use scarce health resources better.
To take some examples from the Pandemic Flu plan for Leics (pop 1050000, so multiply by 70 or so for UK figures) with an infection rate of 50% and 2.5% fatality rate there would be 12,500 excess deaths in a 3 month pandemic, reduce that infection rate to 25% and the excess deaths are 6,250. Roughly this projects to 350000 nationally.
If the mortality is half that, then we are looking at 175000 lives saved. It is a No brainer. Today in Italy there were an increase of 40% of cases, but the measures have only been in place a couple of days, so these are people infected before the measures were put in place.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
On the positive side, house prices are likely to come down.
If that’s aimed at me, as against SeanT, you can fucking do one.
I think I am allowed one big fat fuck you post. I started my Coronavirus fear fest, on here, about two weeks ago. I said from the start this was going to be big and it was going to be scary. I was roundly mocked, ridiculed, Pooh-poohed, called a big poncey bedwetter, and much else.
I responded by calmly and correctly pointing out that you autistic pb twats were exhibiting Normalcy Bias, indeed a classic case of it.
For that I was roundly mocked, abused, belittled, blah blah blah
Which is all fair enough. That’s PB. You dish it out, you take it.
But now it’s my turn to dish it out to you trainspotters.
I was right. You were all wrong. Very, very wrong.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
Yes, it is apocalyptic, even if Coronavirus only has a CFR slightly more than normal flu. ~0.3%
There will be many millions who are critically ill who will need care. They will collapse health systems so the CFR will rocket.
But there are still grounds for optimism. Some of these bugs melt away with summer. Which is coming. It is nearly March.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
Yes, it is apocalyptic, even if Coronavirus only has a CFR slightly more than normal flu. ~0.3%
There will be many millions who are critically ill who will need care. They will collapse health systems so the CFR will rocket.
But there are still grounds for optimism. Some of these bugs melt away with summer. Which is coming. It is nearly March.
Pray to God for warmth and light.
On the subject of prayer, America is bonkers. Never have I heard such blasphemy.
On tonight's debate: Yes, Bloomberg and the other candidates will be piling as much ordure on Sanders as they can, but I don't think it will make much difference. Sanders won't be put off-balance by this, as Bloomberg was in the previous debate; he's good at coming up with disingenuous but impressive-sounding rebuttals of criticism, and he's had plenty of practice. I expect him to bat away the attacks without much difficulty.
This really should be close to a head to head by now and a binary choice. That field is ridiculous.
It's quite difficult doing comparisons with previous races because sometimes no-hope candidates stayed in well after they should have but I can't find any precedent for seven serious candidates in the race after 40% of the delegates have been determined.
I don't think it should have whittled down to just two candidates but the attrition rate so far has been exceptionally low, despite an exceptionally wide field. This close to Super Tuesday, for an open nomination, I think you'd normally be looking at about 3-4 serious candidates.
Yes that would be manageable. At the moment Bernie is looking like getting an unassailable lead on a plurality of not much more than 30%. I think that the Democrats will come to regret that.
This really should be close to a head to head by now and a binary choice. That field is ridiculous.
It's quite difficult doing comparisons with previous races because sometimes no-hope candidates stayed in well after they should have but I can't find any precedent for seven serious candidates in the race after 40% of the delegates have been determined.
I don't think it should have whittled down to just two candidates but the attrition rate so far has been exceptionally low, despite an exceptionally wide field. This close to Super Tuesday, for an open nomination, I think you'd normally be looking at about 3-4 serious candidates.
Yes that would be manageable. At the moment Bernie is looking like getting an unassailable lead on a plurality of not much more than 30%. I think that the Democrats will come to regret that.
That's right.
If you have four candidates around the 10-15% mark, and one candidate on 30% (which is what's happening right now), then the candidate on 30% will get 60% of the delegates.
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
Yes, it is apocalyptic, even if Coronavirus only has a CFR slightly more than normal flu. ~0.3%
There will be many millions who are critically ill who will need care. They will collapse health systems so the CFR will rocket.
But there are still grounds for optimism. Some of these bugs melt away with summer. Which is coming. It is nearly March.
Pray to God for warmth and light.
This January and February is set to be only the fifth since 1659 where the Central England Temperature was an average of 6C or above in both months.
That is to say that we've had an exceptionally warm start to the year, and it's not impossible that March is colder, rather than warmer.
I'd like to remind you all that I have as many pledged delegates as Michael Bloomberg.
Unlike Boris you are not qualified to be President
Boris has never been qualified to be President as he’s never had residence in the US for fourteen whole years. He also renounced his US citizenship some years back, and in any case when he first entered the Cabinet he would have been deemed by the State Department to have lost it by serving in a foreign government.
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
Europe and global markets in general are now exhibiting signs of the Panic phase of covid-19, that most of Asia was in a month ago. And that our good friend Eadric was in 2 weeks ago.
The good news is this panic phase subsides when prudent management stops new cases from going exponential, which is the case now in China, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. The bad news is that economic activity remains very low.
I hope that European politicians and officials spent the last few days talking to their Singaporean counterparts. It is remarkable how thoroughly almost every case here has now been traced to its infection point, using a combination of cell phone gps, cctv and most recently biological analysis - the big Church cluster here has now finally been successfully traced to a worker at the church who had attended a Chinese New Year dinner attended by two Wuhan visitors.
The doom and gloom and resignation to tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths in the UK is understandable but unnecessary. A digital surveillance state like the UK with a centralised health system is well equipped to contain this but the trade off will be a 2020 recession. It should be lighter than in Asia, given the UK’s economic bias to services, which apart from tourism can be satisfactorily managed on a Work From Home basis. Good job the new boy at No 11 has a fiscally expansionist Budget lined up. And I see they are taking my advice in random testing of thousands to see if there’s a hidden reservoir of mild or asymptomatic cases
The reactive rather than proactive response from the Health Dept and FCO are not however very encouraging. Telling people that have visited Italy to self isolate is all well and good, but why were you letting them go there on Monday in the first place? Hancock cut a pathetic figure with his “ooh well I’m not saying don’t go to Italy. Or am I? I wouldn’t go. Should you? Ooh I don’t know really, let me come back to you when we’ve wasted another day thinking about it”.
As others have noted, they should also be throwing money at ramping up ICU beds and I’ve seen no sign of that yet.
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
Damning Boris by quoting official government documents, for Richard is such a scoundrel
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
Unfortunately for the EU their counter-party in these negotiations has recently received a majority of >80 in a general election, as a result of the unfathomable wisdom of the British public.
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
Harvard epidemiology professor, Lipsitch: “I think the likely outcome is that it will ultimately not be containable.”
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
That sounds all nice and lovely and he's right going on the experience so far: most will have mild symptoms and recover. However, it does rather leave a lot unsaid about those who don't, if his estimate is right.
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
73 million actually died in WW2 and of those who actually served in the armed forces, Nazi Germany had a 29% death rate, Japan a 25% death rate and the Soviet Union a 31% death rate, rather more than 1-3% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
Isn’t the commitment to maintain the existing level playing field requirements, but eu now want dynamic alignment on their terms only. They shout and we jump. Always been dead against no deal and walking away. But now it is becoming evident that there is no good faith.
One of the things that slightly concerns me about coronavirus is the way that a lot of people/politicians who could have been relied upon until very recently to caution against any sort of panic that might make matters worse are not necessarily taking that approach today. A possible reason for this is that they themselves have been unsettled by recent political events such as Brexit, Trump, Putin, Syria, etc. I hope I'm wrong about this though.
Not panic, but severe closedowns and quarantine are simply the most effective control methods. They also spread the duration of the pandemic to use scarce health resources better.
To take some examples from the Pandemic Flu plan for Leics (pop 1050000, so multiply by 70 or so for UK figures) with an infection rate of 50% and 2.5% fatality rate there would be 12,500 excess deaths in a 3 month pandemic, reduce that infection rate to 25% and the excess deaths are 6,250. Roughly this projects to 350000 nationally.
If the mortality is half that, then we are looking at 175000 lives saved. It is a No brainer. Today in Italy there were an increase of 40% of cases, but the measures have only been in place a couple of days, so these are people infected before the measures were put in place.
Those no deal Brexit refrigeration capacity would come in handy to store the bodies.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
One of the things that slightly concerns me about coronavirus is the way that a lot of people/politicians who could have been relied upon until very recently to caution against any sort of panic that might make matters worse are not necessarily taking that approach today. A possible reason for this is that they themselves have been unsettled by recent political events such as Brexit, Trump, Putin, Syria, etc. I hope I'm wrong about this though.
That's the thing causing concern for me. The CDC mood music has changed massively over the past few days.
If this does get into the wild in my area of the UK I'd rather not got out if I can avoid it. Given how quickly it has gone from one confirmed case to hundreds in Italy, SK, and Iran once they start testing the general population, I've decided to grab another few weeks worth of food, and keeping my petrol tank full.
I am personally at almost no risk of death from it, but I'd like to have the resources to avoid my parents needing to go out if this does get here.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
The political declaration is not legally binding and nothing in the terms of a Canada style deal prevents a reasonable level playing field
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
I think you want a playing field that is much bigger, by more than an order of magnitude, and much more diverse, with much more far reaching consequences.
I think it should be obvious that for a much bigger and much more complicated playing field the provisions which try to achieve a fair and even level will also have to be more extensive and - for both partners - also more intrusive.
The more you try to limit the level playing field provisions, the more the playing field will shrink, but that will not turn out to be Simples.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
The political declaration is not legally binding and nothing in the terms of a Canada style deal prevents a reasonable level playing field
Nothing in CETA should prevent a level playing field between Canada and the EU, but due to the entirely different size and nature of the UK-EU playing field, CETA on its own could not secure that this different playing field was and remained leveled and fair.
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
I think you want a playing field that is much bigger, by more than an order of magnitude, and much more diverse, with much more far reaching consequences.
I think it should be obvious that for a much bigger and much more complicated playing field the provisions which try to achieve a fair and even level will also have to be more extensive and - for both partners - also more intrusive.
The more you try to limit the level playing field provisions, the more the playing field will shrink, but that will not turn out to be Simples.
Most UK exports now go outside the EU and if the EU insist on keeping the UK in the Single Market and Customs Union in all but name rather than agree a simpler Canada style FTA then WTO terms it will have to be
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
The political declaration is not legally binding and nothing in the terms of a Canada style deal prevents a reasonable level playing field
Nothing in CETA should prevent a level playing field between Canada and the EU, but due to the entirely different size and nature of the UK-EU playing field, CETA on its own could not secure that this different playing field was and remained leveled and fair.
It could, just Barnier and the EU are ideologically determined to ensure that it won't
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
I think you want a playing field that is much bigger, by more than an order of magnitude, and much more diverse, with much more far reaching consequences.
I think it should be obvious that for a much bigger and much more complicated playing field the provisions which try to achieve a fair and even level will also have to be more extensive and - for both partners - also more intrusive.
The more you try to limit the level playing field provisions, the more the playing field will shrink, but that will not turn out to be Simples.
Most UK exports now go outside the EU and if the EU insist on keeping the UK in the Single Market and Customs Union in all but name rather than agree a simpler Canada style FTA then WTO terms it will have to be
I agree that the no deal scenario is now by far the most likely outcome, but it will not be Simples for the EU, and it will be even much, much less Simples for the UK.
One of the things that slightly concerns me about coronavirus is the way that a lot of people/politicians who could have been relied upon until very recently to caution against any sort of panic that might make matters worse are not necessarily taking that approach today. A possible reason for this is that they themselves have been unsettled by recent political events such as Brexit, Trump, Putin, Syria, etc. I hope I'm wrong about this though.
That's the thing causing concern for me. The CDC mood music has changed massively over the past few days.
If this does get into the wild in my area of the UK I'd rather not got out if I can avoid it. Given how quickly it has gone from one confirmed case to hundreds in Italy, SK, and Iran once they start testing the general population, I've decided to grab another few weeks worth of food, and keeping my petrol tank full.
I am personally at almost no risk of death from it, but I'd like to have the resources to avoid my parents needing to go out if this does get here.
Good plan. We're stocking up on foods and pet food.
Also, get a supply of neoprene gloves to wear while in public, and a large supplies of hand sanitizer and alcohol wipes for wiping down things you have to touch. Learn how to take the gloves off without infecting yourself
Well, well. I see some people were objecting to my characterisation of the Boris government as the worst in my lifetime (I was born in 1953. so I've seen a fair number).
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION... the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
Isn’t the commitment to maintain the existing level playing field requirements, but eu now want dynamic alignment on their terms only. They shout and we jump. Always been dead against no deal and walking away. But now it is becoming evident that there is no good faith.
Lack of good faith by the EU was what underpinned the rejection of the Backstop for many of us.
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
The LPF in the political declaration is far more vague than what the EU is trying to negotiate in the new negotiating guidelines. They all talk about the reference point being EU law, but not UK law. How is that level? It is tilted in favour of them.
The EU is demanding unreasonable things once again. They are making the same mistake for the third time in this mess.
"Battle Beneath the Earth" was the movie. Described as "deliriously paranoid".
A British movie frm the mid 60's. You can tell it is a British movie because all the Chinese characters are played by Brits with names like Martin and Peter.....
"But Martin was born in the East End of London, into a Jewish family, the son of a Russian-Jewish grocer and his Polish-Jewish wife who had left Russia at the revolution....."
"Quite. He looks like a dodgy foreigner. He'll do....."
We simply want the same level playing field the EU required from Canada or Japan for its FTAs with them, if not we walk and go to WTO terms. Simple
And not, for example, the level playing field as defined in the agreement that we signed only last year? An Englishman's word is apparently akin to a mayfly...
The political declaration is not legally binding and nothing in the terms of a Canada style deal prevents a reasonable level playing field
Nothing in CETA should prevent a level playing field between Canada and the EU, but due to the entirely different size and nature of the UK-EU playing field, CETA on its own could not secure that this different playing field was and remained leveled and fair.
It could, just Barnier and the EU are ideologically determined to ensure that it won't
The toys are well and truly being thrown out of the pram right now.
It's been fun watching all the really clever analysts on here respond to the coronavirus. Some update their views quickly, some just double down again and again.
Comments
Sky paper reviewer on covid -19 says it is very exciting and repeats it
People have died, thousands suffering, and real economic damage is possible
And its 'exciting'. She needs to have more respect
And of course they will in their thousands.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/24/coronavirus-covid-19-global-pandemic-closed-borders-market-crash/
Leaving you with an all-shite field.
The UK has only 4048 adult critical care beds, of which there were exactly 1000 available at the last reporting day (near the end of December 2019) - fewer than a quarter.
As soon as intensive care facilities become full, you can expect people who would have recovered from the virus, to die. You can also expect other people who currently form part of the 3000 now in intensive care but who wouldn't be able to get a bed because of all the Covid-19 cases, to die as well.
This is not exciting. This is f*cking scary.
And Super Tuesday is only a week away.
"Lipsitch predicts that, within the coming year, some 40 to 70 percent of people around the world will be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But, he clarifies emphatically, this does not mean that all will have severe illnesses. “It’s likely that many will have mild disease, or may be asymptomatic,” he said."
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/02/covid-vaccine/607000/
Fuck it. Let's go for twenty, and then at least it's a simple head-to-head.
Whatever Mike has in Sanders, Sanders has ten times more on Bloomberg.
You know, they should make Warren the nominee as she's the only (vaguely serious) candidate who can't be called by a name beginnig with 'b'.
I don't think it should have whittled down to just two candidates but the attrition rate so far has been exceptionally low, despite an exceptionally wide field. This close to Super Tuesday, for an open nomination, I think you'd normally be looking at about 3-4 serious candidates.
A long way to go but Trump vs. Bernie is not the foregone conclusion most on here think it is.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1232407079379505153
Let's stick some numbers on it.
40% of the global population is 3.1bn; 70% is 5.4bn.
Even if only 1% of those with Covid-19 die, then that's a death toll of 30-55m.
On the other hand, if health systems are overwhelmed and not only the 2% of cases as experienced in Wuhan result in deaths but a third of the critical ones too, due to lack of care facilities (giving a 3.5% mortality rate), then that's about 110-190m people, or two to three times the death toll from WW2.
That's not counting secondary effects, from health systems collapsing due to infected staff through to severe economic, social and political disruption.
So, for example, decriminalising those who attempt to cross the border is not... ummm... universally popular.
Likewise, taking away people's existing healthcare plans polls really poorly.
And that wealth tax... while I personally am a fan of wealth taxes (albeit charged at a very low level), it's not... ahhh... much more popular than the Coronavirus.
To take some examples from the Pandemic Flu plan for Leics (pop 1050000, so multiply by 70 or so for UK figures) with an infection rate of 50% and 2.5% fatality rate there would be 12,500 excess deaths in a 3 month pandemic, reduce that infection rate to 25% and the excess deaths are 6,250. Roughly this projects to 350000 nationally.
If the mortality is half that, then we are looking at 175000 lives saved. It is a No brainer. Today in Italy there were an increase of 40% of cases, but the measures have only been in place a couple of days, so these are people infected before the measures were put in place.
https://twitter.com/mcspocky/status/1232097129365221377?s=19
If you have four candidates around the 10-15% mark, and one candidate on 30% (which is what's happening right now), then the candidate on 30% will get 60% of the delegates.
That is to say that we've had an exceptionally warm start to the year, and it's not impossible that March is colder, rather than warmer.
Let's see:
However, Downing Street reacted negatively to the suggestion and claimed it did not recognise the need for a “level playing field” between the UK and EU at all, in spite of the goals of the political declaration.
“Level playing field is an EU construct, not a piece of terminology which we use,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/25/downing-street-rejects-eu-opening-trade-offer
And let's contrast that with the Political Declaration which Boris signed up to:
Page 6: However, with a view to facilitating the movement of goods across borders, the Parties envisage comprehensive arrangements that will create a free trade area, combining deep regulatory and customs cooperation, underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition, as set out in Section XIV of this Part [and other reference on the same page]
Page 14, heading for Section XIV: XIV. LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR OPEN AND FAIR COMPETITION...
the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition, encompassing robust commitments to ensure a level playing field
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/840656/Political_Declaration_setting_out_the_framework_for_the_future_relationship_between_the_European_Union_and_the_United_Kingdom.pdf
One can hardly blame the EU for being dubious about whether this government can be trusted in anything.
The good news is this panic phase subsides when prudent management stops new cases from going exponential, which is the case now in China, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. The bad news is that economic activity remains very low.
I hope that European politicians and officials spent the last few days talking to their Singaporean counterparts. It is remarkable how thoroughly almost every case here has now been traced to its infection point, using a combination of cell phone gps, cctv and most recently biological analysis - the big Church cluster here has now finally been successfully traced to a worker at the church who had attended a Chinese New Year dinner attended by two Wuhan visitors.
The doom and gloom and resignation to tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths in the UK is understandable but unnecessary. A digital surveillance state like the UK with a centralised health system is well equipped to contain this but the trade off will be a 2020 recession. It should be lighter than in Asia, given the UK’s economic bias to services, which apart from tourism can be satisfactorily managed on a Work From Home basis. Good job the new boy at No 11 has a fiscally expansionist Budget lined up. And I see they are taking my advice in random testing of thousands to see if there’s a hidden reservoir of mild or asymptomatic cases
The reactive rather than proactive response from the Health Dept and FCO are not however very encouraging. Telling people that have visited Italy to self isolate is all well and good, but why were you letting them go there on Monday in the first place? Hancock cut a pathetic figure with his “ooh well I’m not saying don’t go to Italy. Or am I? I wouldn’t go. Should you? Ooh I don’t know really, let me come back to you when we’ve wasted another day thinking about it”.
As others have noted, they should also be throwing money at ramping up ICU beds and I’ve seen no sign of that yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1232406719147511818?s=20
Those no deal Brexit refrigeration capacity would come in handy to store the bodies.
If this does get into the wild in my area of the UK I'd rather not got out if I can avoid it. Given how quickly it has gone from one confirmed case to hundreds in Italy, SK, and Iran once they start testing the general population, I've decided to grab another few weeks worth of food, and keeping my petrol tank full.
I am personally at almost no risk of death from it, but I'd like to have the resources to avoid my parents needing to go out if this does get here.
I think you want a playing field that is much bigger, by more than an order of magnitude, and much more diverse, with much more far reaching consequences.
I think it should be obvious that for a much bigger and much more complicated playing field the provisions which try to achieve a fair and even level will also have to be more extensive and - for both partners - also more intrusive.
The more you try to limit the level playing field provisions, the more the playing field will shrink, but that will not turn out to be Simples.
Live stream:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klDbFuxmXrA
Also, get a supply of neoprene gloves to wear while in public, and a large supplies of hand sanitizer and alcohol wipes for wiping down things you have to touch. Learn how to take the gloves off without infecting yourself
Seems we were right to worry.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.128161111
The EU is demanding unreasonable things once again. They are making the same mistake for the third time in this mess.
Seems Biden can remember that movie too. Except, he recalls it as a documentary.....
Seems he can remember Ali's rope-a-dope too.....
A British movie frm the mid 60's. You can tell it is a British movie because all the Chinese characters are played by Brits with names like Martin and Peter.....
"But Martin was born in the East End of London, into a Jewish family, the son of a Russian-Jewish grocer and his Polish-Jewish wife who had left Russia at the revolution....."
"Quite. He looks like a dodgy foreigner. He'll do....."
Back in the days when UKIP made movies......
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/grace-assembly-coronavirus-mystery-solved-mega-cluster-linked-to-2-wuhan-tourists-via-a
This is Brexit. Get used to it.