In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Could you imagine Corbyn, or any of the current front bench, saying anything like that about any Tory?
Don't know about them, but I feel the same way about Rees-Mogg as he does about Corbyn. I think his politics are completely insane, but I admire the way he comes to his own opinion on things without worrying about how popular his views will be with any any group. His defence of Shamima Begum is a classic example of that.
So his tribute to Corbyn doesn't surprise me at all.
No, the label was used in conjunction with accusations that he was explicitly trying to kill off the old and infirm as a matter of policy. There was no 'misinterpretation' possible. It is an accusation that is still being made regularly on social media.
It's a tribute to the leftist twitterati that they credit Boris with selflessly wanting to kill off his own core voters.
Plenty of PB’ers have taken the trouble to explain to us over the years how they are quickly replaced.
It's clearly a breach of contract. Indeed a large number of breaches of contract. I hope they get their pants sued off.
Not an expert but i think there are late payment regulations that mean Wetherspoons would be liable for interest payments and costs of debt recovery after 30 days of invoice or delivery.
Some will come to his defence but the vast majority of the country, including a large number of labour supporters, will just be glad to see the back of him
My only concern is that Starmer makes the error of putting him in the shadow cabinet
Another four Italian doctors have died with the coronavirus, bringing the toll in the epidemic up to 29, the national federation of doctors told ANSA, reports Lorenzo Tondo in Italy.
Over 5,000 Italian health workers have been infected with Covid-19 so far.
The Assomed union has called for immediate action ‘’to provide all workers with individual protection equipment’’.
Meanwhile, Civil protection department head and coronavirus commissioner Angelo Borrelli has cancelled his daily six o’clock press conference after suffering symptoms of fever. The result of a test is being awaited.
I hope coffee has the same effect as tea as I had a new fandangled coffee maker delivered the other day. Mrs U not impressed with this big shiny thing now taking up a large part of the kitchen. I want to be able to tell her it is for protection against CV.
Isn't there a danger with this test that people say "Oh I've had the test, I'm safe to go out cos I've already had it" when actually they haven't and just want to go out?
I don't think this is correct. Prof Ferguson produced the paper that convinced the government to change its policy. Ferguson does appear to have been sceptical earlier that containment policies would actually reduce the infection rate and that may have influenced government policy. He seems to have revised his mortality estimates downwards. I doubt know whether that's because the containment methods are effective or due to a better understanding of the epidemic after a couple of weeks.
Incidentally the information about the Italian mortality and serious illness rates that informed Ferguson's paper was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
Is there a source for the claim that this information was only shared at this meeting, and not more widely? Seems a bit strange to keep information like this secret.
The UK apparently refused to join this series of meetings although it could have done under transition rules, because it has a policy of boycotting all EU meetings during the transition. It wasn't EU secrecy; it was simply a question of UK government ideology. Other member states asset that detailed information on the Italian situation was available at that meeting.
I don't think this is correct. Prof Ferguson produced the paper that convinced the government to change its policy. Ferguson does appear to have been sceptical earlier that containment policies would actually reduce the infection rate and that may have influenced government policy. He seems to have revised his mortality estimates downwards. I doubt know whether that's because the containment methods are effective or due to a better understanding of the epidemic after a couple of weeks.
Incidentally the information about the Italian mortality and serious illness rates that informed Ferguson's paper was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
Is there a source for the claim that this information was only shared at this meeting, and not more widely? Seems a bit strange to keep information like this secret.
The UK apparently refused to join this series of meetings although it could have done under transition rules, because it has a policy of boycotting all EU meetings during the transition. It wasn't EU secrecy; it was simply a question of UK government ideology. Other member states asset that detailed information on the Italian situation was available at that meeting.
I'll take that as a no then.
You can take it as whatever you want.
I mean if you are going to make a claim that information that would have changed government policy was only discussed in secret at an EU meeting that the UK didn't attend (unsurprisingly), then you should really have a source to back that up.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Maybe they shouldn't have spent all the money on avocado toast or lattes. Maybe they should have saved up a rainy day fund so they could pay their debts responsibly.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Well for a start they could have kept on those 40,000 staff. The Government would have paid 80% of their wages with no requirement on Weatherspoon's part to pay the other 20%.
And they can abide by the law. Not paying for goods already delivered is clearly in breach of their legal requirements and will result in law suits. Normally I would be unhappy with a business going bust but since he has already sacked his whole workforce I hope the bastard loses everything.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Maybe they shouldn't have spent all the money on avocado toast or lattes. Maybe they should have saved up a rainy day fund so they could pay their debts responsibly.
Don't be silly, no such business keeps enough 'saved up for a rainy day' to withstand an out-of-the-blue 100% wipeout of turnover. People really do need to get a bit more real.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Maybe they shouldn't have spent all the money on avocado toast or lattes. Maybe they should have saved up a rainy day fund so they could pay their debts responsibly.
Don't be silly, no such business keeps enough 'saved up for a rainy day' to withstand an out-of-the-blue 100% wipeout of turnover. People really do need to get a bit more real.
They shouldn't have accepted deliver of goods they couldn't pay for.
We have a word for businesses that can't pay their debts, it's bankrupt.
If they are not bankrupt they should pay their debts. Less avocado toast, more payment of debts.
Broth is clearly better for you than tea if you get coronavirus, do not believe a Communist dictator. Epping Tescos now got a few more supplies, even got some mince and security guard enforcing queing up outside at least 2 metres apart so not too many in the store at any 1 time
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Well for a start they could have kept on those 40,000 staff. The Government would have paid 80% of their wages with no requirement on Weatherspoon's part to pay the other 20%.
And they can abide by the law. Not paying for goods already delivered is clearly in breach of their legal requirements and will result in law suits. Normally I would be unhappy with a business going bust but since he has already sacked his whole workforce I hope the bastard loses everything.
If we don't want businesses to act entirely in the interests of their owners, then maybe we shouldn't set them up such that that's their entire driving motivation
Well for a start they could have kept on those 40,000 staff. The Government would have paid 80% of their wages with no requirement on Weatherspoon's part to pay the other 20%.
And they can abide by the law. Not paying for goods already delivered is clearly in breach of their legal requirements and will result in law suits. Normally I would be unhappy with a business going bust but since he has already sacked his whole workforce I hope the bastard loses everything.
Possibly he will lose everything. Not sure that helps. At least at the moment there is a reasonable chance of those creditors being paid eventually.
Of course suppliers can sue if they want to. Fat lot of good it will do them if there's no business left to sue.
Elegantly written but completely wrong, and I say that as someone who has been careful not to become an instant expert. The experts are quite capable of making mistakes (cf herd immunity). Sensible questions asked by intelligent non-experts are more likely to expose the points of controversy.
There was some derision posted about the mathematicians who queried the idea of herd immunity. But it was applied mathematics and they turned out to be right.
Who we pay attention to is an entirely different matter.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
More London orbit seats will probably fall to Labour in the coming decade. It’s just the repositioning of the two parties. Those Durham and Northumberland seats were always going to fall sooner or later.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Maybe they shouldn't have spent all the money on avocado toast or lattes. Maybe they should have saved up a rainy day fund so they could pay their debts responsibly.
Don't be silly, no such business keeps enough 'saved up for a rainy day' to withstand an out-of-the-blue 100% wipeout of turnover. People really do need to get a bit more real.
They shouldn't have accepted deliver of goods they couldn't pay for.
We have a word for businesses that can't pay their debts, it's bankrupt.
If they are not bankrupt they should pay their debts. Less avocado toast, more payment of debts.
They could pay for them, on any reasonable assumption. It's called a going concern basis. It's how every single business works - and every individual who takes out a loan or mortgage on the basis that they have a steady income to pay it back.
Of course, yes, now they may be bankrupt. That's up to the suppliers. If they accept the delay in payment, the company might survive and they might get paid. If they don't, it will probably go bankrupt and they definitely won't get paid.
No, the label was used in conjunction with accusations that he was explicitly trying to kill off the old and infirm as a matter of policy. There was no 'misinterpretation' possible. It is an accusation that is still being made regularly on social media.
It's a tribute to the leftist twitterati that they credit Boris with selflessly wanting to kill off his own core voters.
Plenty of PB’ers have taken the trouble to explain to us over the years how they are quickly replaced.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Well for a start they could have kept on those 40,000 staff. The Government would have paid 80% of their wages with no requirement on Weatherspoon's part to pay the other 20%.
And they can abide by the law. Not paying for goods already delivered is clearly in breach of their legal requirements and will result in law suits. Normally I would be unhappy with a business going bust but since he has already sacked his whole workforce I hope the bastard loses everything.
Absolutely. I have no sympathy with him.
He is in the same category as Ashley and if both lost everything I frankly do not care
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Well for a start they could have kept on those 40,000 staff. The Government would have paid 80% of their wages with no requirement on Weatherspoon's part to pay the other 20%....
Possibly. But when those payments are likely to actually be made (as opposed to when employees qualify for them) is for now entirely unclear, as is how long they might last beyond the initial three months.
I don't hold any brief for Weatherspoons, dislike the proprietor intensely, and am not defending the decision to sack all those staff - but the situation is not clearcut.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
More London orbit seats will probably fall to Labour in the coming decade. It’s just the repositioning of the two parties. Those Durham and Northumberland seats were always going to fall sooner or later.
Equally there is every reason to think Labour’s collapse in the North and Wales still has a fair way to go yet.
In my best Jeremy Corbyn mode of defending the underdog: I think we should cut Weatherspoon's some slack. The business is a low-margin, high-fixed-cost, volume business. For reasons entirely out of its control, it has just gone from a fairly predictable, steady weekly cash-based income to zero turnover, in the course of a few days. What on earth do people expect the company to do? They can go bust - in fact, the directors have a legal obligation to go bust if they can't find any other solution - or they can drastically slash outgoings and aggressively conserve cash to try to stay afloat in the hope of becoming viable again when the crisis is over. I really don't think anyone who hasn't seen the books and sat in on the board meetings is in any position to criticise them, but the losses and the cash outflow they would be facing must be absolutely gob-smacking, and horrendous for the directors. If they do call in the receivers, creditors will be wiped out.
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
Maybe they shouldn't have spent all the money on avocado toast or lattes. Maybe they should have saved up a rainy day fund so they could pay their debts responsibly.
Don't be silly, no such business keeps enough 'saved up for a rainy day' to withstand an out-of-the-blue 100% wipeout of turnover. People really do need to get a bit more real.
They shouldn't have accepted deliver of goods they couldn't pay for.
We have a word for businesses that can't pay their debts, it's bankrupt.
If they are not bankrupt they should pay their debts. Less avocado toast, more payment of debts.
Currently there are no rules.
If you think UK Ltd is in a position to pay its debts in the current circumstances you are in for a shock. Our bank sources say this is the worst they've seen with many companies have zero turnover in the last 2 weeks. You cant pay debts with no cash flow.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
Ah but they'll all return to the fold - the incumbency factor which is so critical to Labour holding all.. oops both.. their gains doesn't apply to Tories.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
Ah but they'll all return to the fold - the incumbency factor which is so critical to Labour holding all.. oops both.. their gains doesn't apply to Tories.
It didn’t apply to Labour in Kensington either, which should have been a cakewalk after Grenfell.
Admittedly, having Emma Dent Coad as candidate may have been a drawback.
As an expert in the field, I get very frustrated with some of the nonsense that gets spouted under the banner of XR. It's not all of them by any means, but certainly there are hypocrites and loons in the movement. And I do worry about the risk of alienating people from the issue, which so far has happened surprisingly little.
But I can't argue with their results so far. They've achieved far more than people like me have by calmly talking about the evidence. Sad but true. They are in credit at the moment.
So, I take it you're a big fan of Jem Bendell and the Deep Adaptation crowd then?
Recent research suggests that human societies will experience disruptions to their basic functioning within less than ten years due to climate stress. Such disruptions include increased levels of malnutrition, starvation, disease, civil conflict and war – and will not avoid affluent nations.
In a sense, at least XR are "optimists" enough that they think something can still be done to prevent catastrophic climate change and we just need to get cracking with it...
Presumably if you encountered someone offering qualified praise for the Muslim Council for Britain, you would reply "So, I take it you're a big fan of Islamic State".
Apologies wink was supposed to be a signal of irony...
But he does seem to have built up a bit of a cult following, is capable of getting funding, and operates on a very different model to XR. Different message too.
I was curious what you make of him, as a professional in the field with an academic angle. It strikes me that where XR have been successful largely aligns with your interests (getting people to take climate change seriously and potentially moving civil society towards enacting steps that might do something about it) and you've been lucky that their more extreme members, who depart from conventional science, haven't, as far as I can see, been quite so successful in the areas where they're misaligned with you. Politicians may pay more attention to messaging and opinion polls than to a scientific evidence base, but 'twas ever thus - and climate change academia still seems a place where a lot of level-headed scientists are pursuing careful, evidence-based approaches; they don't seem to be being purged or defunded en masse for "insufficient radicalism" to make way for politically-driven activist types who spout scientifically illiterate prophecies in the hope of capturing the public's or politicians' attention.
The "Deep Adaptation" crowd, with their pessimism that the most damaging levels of climate change can be avoided and suggested switch of effort to surviving our new reality, seem more fundamentally at odds with you (as I was sarcastically attempting to suggest). Their strategy of trying to gain a foothold within academia is interesting too - in ten years' time, how many geography departments will have bright young radical academics with PhDs in an autoethnographic account of my preparations to survive the imminent climate apocalpyse or similar? I meet quite a few young graduates on the humanities/social science side of things for whom this message seems to resonate.
I don't think this is correct. Prof Ferguson produced the paper that convinced the government to change its policy. Ferguson does appear to have been sceptical earlier that containment policies would actually reduce the infection rate and that may have influenced government policy. He seems to have revised his mortality estimates downwards. I doubt know whether that's because the containment methods are effective or due to a better understanding of the epidemic after a couple of weeks.
Incidentally the information about the Italian mortality and serious illness rates that informed Ferguson's paper was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
Is there a source for the claim that this information was only shared at this meeting, and not more widely? Seems a bit strange to keep information like this secret.
The UK apparently refused to join this series of meetings although it could have done under transition rules, because it has a policy of boycotting all EU meetings during the transition. It wasn't EU secrecy; it was simply a question of UK government ideology. Other member states asset that detailed information on the Italian situation was available at that meeting.
I'll take that as a no then.
You can take it as whatever you want.
I mean if you are going to make a claim that information that would have changed government policy was only discussed in secret at an EU meeting that the UK didn't attend (unsurprisingly), then you should really have a source to back that up.
Maybe you could stop being disingenuous? That wasn't what I wrote.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
More London orbit seats will probably fall to Labour in the coming decade. It’s just the repositioning of the two parties. Those Durham and Northumberland seats were always going to fall sooner or later.
Equally there is every reason to think Labour’s collapse in the North and Wales still has a fair way to go yet.
I wrote this in 2015, before Jeremy Corbyn was elected:
More London orbit seats will probably fall to Labour in the coming decade. It’s just the repositioning of the two parties. Those Durham and Northumberland seats were always going to fall sooner or later.
Equally there is every reason to think Labour’s collapse in the North and Wales still has a fair way to go yet.
I wrote this in 2015, before Jeremy Corbyn was elected:
It stands up well. Jeremy Corbyn is not Labour's only problem.
You were right, but if anything I think you are underestimating the scale of Labour’s problems in Wales. My thread header on that threw up some real surprises. (It is complete, but I am waiting for the right moment to offer it, as at the moment it wouldn’t really be relevant.)
I don't think this is correct. Prof Ferguson produced the paper that convinced the government to change its policy. Ferguson does appear to have been sceptical earlier that containment policies would actually reduce the infection rate and that may have influenced government policy. He seems to have revised his mortality estimates downwards. I doubt know whether that's because the containment methods are effective or due to a better understanding of the epidemic after a couple of weeks.
Incidentally the information about the Italian mortality and serious illness rates that informed Ferguson's paper was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
Is there a source for the claim that this information was only shared at this meeting, and not more widely? Seems a bit strange to keep information like this secret.
The UK apparently refused to join this series of meetings although it could have done under transition rules, because it has a policy of boycotting all EU meetings during the transition. It wasn't EU secrecy; it was simply a question of UK government ideology. Other member states asset that detailed information on the Italian situation was available at that meeting.
I'll take that as a no then.
You can take it as whatever you want.
I mean if you are going to make a claim that information that would have changed government policy was only discussed in secret at an EU meeting that the UK didn't attend (unsurprisingly), then you should really have a source to back that up.
Maybe you could stop being disingenuous? That wasn't what I wrote.
That’s exactly what you said
was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
You said the government did not have all the information because it did not attend this meeting. I find it surprising that such information would not be made widely available, rather than restricted to only the participants of the meeting. Hence why I asked for a source for the claim.
I don’t think it’s too bad of Jezza to say this really?
It was great to hear. Indeed I wish to post my own little tribute on this the last day (effectively) of Jeremy Corbyn. It’s a moment which IMO should be marked with generosity of spirit towards a man who, whilst not everybody’s cup of tea, has made a notable contribution to the political drama of recent years.
He never wanted to lead the party and even less did he wish to become PM. Like the National Lottery, he is all about Good Causes. A thirst for power and prestige is not in the DNA. Yet he answered the call from colleagues to stand in 2015, and when the membership offered him the LOTO baton, he took it and ran. Despite a reluctance to be “primus inter pares” – preferring “et generis paribus” - he offered himself up as The Man in not one general election but TWO. In the first of these he came closer than any socialist ever has to attaining power in modern Britain. This is perhaps his most enduring legacy. He showed that it was possible for a socialist to win a UK general election so long as the socialist was not him (an easy fix going forwards).
GE19? Still running but straight into a buzz-saw. “Get Brexit Done”. “Boris”. “Parliament versus The People.” Could any Opposition Leader have held up against that? Sadly not. You can do nothing with the Zeitgeist except submit to it. Ask John Major. So let us not dwell on this. The result looks poor but Labour DID win the argument (witness the Tory conversion to anti-Austerity) and they DID move the Overton Window (that radical manifesto can never be unwritten).
But the biggest Corbyn positive lies not in his impact on political debate, welcome though it has been, but in his persona and character. Good (progressive) causes, as noted, and a holding to principle, not self-aggrandizement and opportunism. In an era where the very idea of placing duty over desire is sniggered at, where the meaning of the term “public service” has been all but forgotten, we have had in Jeremy Corbyn a politician to remind us, and this is why all of us here on PB.com should wish him well as he exits the stage today. Regardless of our politics, we can award him the following epithet - the two little words which best sum up his career. He served.
He served his constituency, the Left in general, his party, and – yes – his country.
Thank you, Jeremy. Stay safe now.
Good piece, though the "Good Causes" he supported were not a lottery. Any group of people (immediately labelled by him and his like as a "community") which he could define as being "victims" (in his head) of western liberal democracies (esp USA, but also UK) counted. This led to him being regarded as being unfit for office, particularly PM.
He has left a Labour Party tainted by more than whiff of "not patriotic" and also a party whose values have been revealed as being at odds with the working class conservatives whose votes the party have relied on forever.
These voters (which you disparagingly call WWC) saw the light at the last GE and held their noses and voted for the Conservatives. Now the spell is broken and these voters will not need to hold their noses next time.
This is the legacy he leaves. Sorry.
It has not been one way traffic though - even in 2019 Labour won a significant number of seats in London and the wider South which were Tory in 2015, 2010 and even 2005. Indeed Canterbury remained Tory in 1997!
Holding Canterbury and gaining Putney is a poor exchange for losing four of seven seats in Durham, two of five in Cleveland, one of two in Northumberland, three of seven in Lancashire and five of six in North Wales.
More London orbit seats will probably fall to Labour in the coming decade. It’s just the repositioning of the two parties. Those Durham and Northumberland seats were always going to fall sooner or later.
Equally there is every reason to think Labour’s collapse in the North and Wales still has a fair way to go yet.
I wrote this in 2015, before Jeremy Corbyn was elected:
@Cyclefree Gardening Corner. Today's question is about Microveg grown indoors in my conservatory.
Two weeks ago I planted a seed tray with Spring Onions (LHS in pic below), and Parskey (RHS), using seeds from last year though still in date. The compost was the last from last year.
The Parsley is fine, but the Spring Onions are growing fungus. Is that likely to be the seeds or the compost, and do I need to throw that half of the tray away, and start again - I have both new seeds and new compost?
If we've got lots of antibody test kits becoming available, the first priority should be the NHS and other critical workers, and then some random testing to calibrate the models with some reliable figures. Maybe that is the plan, and there will also be enough to make widely available.
If we've got lots of antibody test kits becoming available, the first priority should be the NHS and other critical workers, and then some random testing to calibrate the models with some reliable figures. Maybe that is the plan, and there will also be enough to make widely available.
The way I read it is that HMG has ordered 3.5 million of the things, and then beyond that kits will go onto amazon or to Boots.
If we've got lots of antibody test kits becoming available, the first priority should be the NHS and other critical workers, and then some random testing to calibrate the models with some reliable figures. Maybe that is the plan, and there will also be enough to make widely available.
If we've got lots of antibody test kits becoming available, the first priority should be the NHS and other critical workers, and then some random testing to calibrate the models with some reliable figures. Maybe that is the plan, and there will also be enough to make widely available.
If they don't ration the kits to say one or two per household, then this is going to be carnage, as hoarders snap them all up so they can test themselves every week.
@Cyclefree Gardening Corner. Today's question is about Microveg grown indoors in my conservatory.
Two weeks ago I planted a seed tray with Spring Onions (LHS in pic below), and Parskey (RHS), using seeds from last year though still in date. The compost was the last from last year.
The Parsley is fine, but the Spring Onions are growing fungus. Is that likely to be the seeds or the compost, and do I need to throw that half of the tray away, and start again - I have both new seeds and new compost?
Thanks
The fungus spores will be in the compost probably. Doesn't matter at all, just pull them out gently. Incidentally you might need some slug pellets to stop the seedlings being attacked.
@Cyclefree Gardening Corner. Today's question is about Microveg grown indoors in my conservatory.
Two weeks ago I planted a seed tray with Spring Onions (LHS in pic below), and Parskey (RHS), using seeds from last year though still in date. The compost was the last from last year.
The Parsley is fine, but the Spring Onions are growing fungus. Is that likely to be the seeds or the compost, and do I need to throw that half of the tray away, and start again - I have both new seeds and new compost?
More likely to be the compost than the seeds (unless the seeds actually look soggy and manky). I'd wash the tray with a weak bleach solution and start again.
If you use water from a rainbutt to water, don't - use tap water initially. The chlorine will help as a fungicide.
If we've got lots of antibody test kits becoming available, the first priority should be the NHS and other critical workers, and then some random testing to calibrate the models with some reliable figures. Maybe that is the plan, and there will also be enough to make widely available.
The way I read it is that HMG has ordered 3.5 million of the things, and then beyond that kits will go onto amazon or to Boots.
Ah, right, makes sense. That's a hell of lot of kits!
How will they control the panic buying of antibody test kits?
Remind people that they will be being touched, bought and therefore kept in a queue with a load of people who have coronavirus?
not if you buy via Amazon.
So they will have been touched by a load of people working crazy hours handling goods from China and Italy while not wearing gloves because their bosses are a mix of loons and lowlifes?
You aren't buying them from Amazon, they are distributing them to Boots. I guess you might get people trying to stockpile them, but hopefully Boots have some sensible system in place.
Apparently hot broth is totally the wrong advice, what you need is...
Venezuela’s embattled president Nicolás Maduro has suggested a novel solution for the coronavirus crisis: drink more tea
And Bolsanaro is outdoing Trump:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-52040205 ...In a televised address on Tuesday, he called on mayors and governors to roll back restrictions they have introduced to curb the spread of Covid-19. His intervention came as the two biggest cities - Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro - went into partial lockdown. Brazil has reported 2,200 confirmed infections and 46 deaths. “Our lives have to go on. Jobs must be kept... We must, yes, get back to normal,” Mr Bolsonaro said, in a speech that sparked protests across the country.
The president described restrictions on public transport, social-distancing measures, and closures of businesses and schools as “scorched-earth” policies. He added that people aged over 60 were at risk, but that most people - including himself - had nothing to fear. "With my history as an athlete, if I were infected with the virus I would have no reason to worry. I would feel nothing, or it would be at most just a little flu."..
How will they control the panic buying of antibody test kits?
Remind people that they will be being touched, bought and therefore kept in a queue with a load of people who have coronavirus?
not if you buy via Amazon.
So they will have been touched by a load of people working crazy hours handling goods from China and Italy while not wearing gloves because their bosses are a mix of loons and lowlifes?
Yeah, that’s much safer.
Raises another question, where are they being made?
How will they control the panic buying of antibody test kits?
Remind people that they will be being touched, bought and therefore kept in a queue with a load of people who have coronavirus?
not if you buy via Amazon.
So they will have been touched by a load of people working crazy hours handling goods from China and Italy while not wearing gloves because their bosses are a mix of loons and lowlifes?
Yeah, that’s much safer.
Raises another question, where are they being made?
Regarding Wetherspoons I reported him telling suppliers to swivel yesterday. As for the legality of it, this is the food industry. As I have patiently explained to several sales directors over the years the contracted terms and conditions are only valid if when push comes to shove you are willing to see them in court. As you've already said that you won't they can do what they like knowing that ultimately you will fold before they will.
Martin or his FD will be assuming that many of their creditors will renegotiate as they will be terrified of losing their sizable contracts. Such is business in this sector. Unfortunately.
How will they control the panic buying of antibody test kits?
HMG setting a bad example by buying 3.5 million of the bloody things.
Not really. Panic buying is buying stuff you won't be able to immediately need or use. I have no doubt that if they work HMG will be needing and using every one of those tests. Indeed I would suggest they should make sure they have enough before allowing a single unit to be sold to the wider public.
Prof Peacock told the committee there are "two different models", with one possible model being a test that is ordered via Amazon and performed at home before being sent back to see whether someone tests positive or negative for coronavirus.
Another "might require you to go somewhere like Boots because it requires a blood prick", she added.
I presume the easy way to stop stockpiling if you have to provide things like ID to buy one, as they need that to be able to know who in order to process it anyway....and I bet the government want to know all sort of demographic info.
I hope Mr Martin has not recently taken out a big dividend from Wetherspoon's. It's important to make sure that this pain sharing, not pain transferring.
Surely those they classed as vulnerable and told to be in complete lock down at home for 12 weeks should get the new test first?
Their lives are potentially miserable, or worse, at the moment.
When I had swine flu in '09 they issued me a code that allowed me (well, the git of a live-in landlord I had to convince to go on my behalf) to collect a dose of Tamiflu from a pharmacist. Priority distribution could be managed in a similar way.
Regarding Wetherspoons I reported him telling suppliers to swivel yesterday. As for the legality of it, this is the food industry. As I have patiently explained to several sales directors over the years the contracted terms and conditions are only valid if when push comes to shove you are willing to see them in court. As you've already said that you won't they can do what they like knowing that ultimately you will fold before they will.
Martin or his FD will be assuming that many of their creditors will renegotiate as they will be terrified of losing their sizable contracts. Such is business in this sector. Unfortunately.
Not to mention the added wrinkle of the courts being largely shut to new litigation...
How will they control the panic buying of antibody test kits?
HMG setting a bad example by buying 3.5 million of the bloody things.
Not really. Panic buying is buying stuff you won't be able to immediately need or use. I have no doubt that if they work HMG will be needing and using every one of those tests. Indeed I would suggest they should make sure they have enough before allowing a single unit to be sold to the wider public.
Comments
(Not that I'd personally ever frequent one of their establishments, having made that mistake once!)
So his tribute to Corbyn doesn't surprise me at all.
Some will come to his defence but the vast majority of the country, including a large number of labour supporters, will just be glad to see the back of him
My only concern is that Starmer makes the error of putting him in the shadow cabinet
Over 5,000 Italian health workers have been infected with Covid-19 so far.
The Assomed union has called for immediate action ‘’to provide all workers with individual protection equipment’’.
Meanwhile, Civil protection department head and coronavirus commissioner Angelo Borrelli has cancelled his daily six o’clock press conference after suffering symptoms of fever. The result of a test is being awaited.
Gorgeous sunshine here. Back to the garden.
Off-licences have been added to the government's list of essential UK retailers allowed to stay open during the coronavirus pandemic.
The list was updated on Wednesday amid increasing reports of supermarkets are selling out some beers and wines.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52033260
And they can abide by the law. Not paying for goods already delivered is clearly in breach of their legal requirements and will result in law suits. Normally I would be unhappy with a business going bust but since he has already sacked his whole workforce I hope the bastard loses everything.
https://twitter.com/winston_chang/status/1242507862229676033
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1242823906613960704?s=20
Their biggest hit will be on their credit insurance which may mean people will no longer be able to supply them on credit.
We have a word for businesses that can't pay their debts, it's bankrupt.
If they are not bankrupt they should pay their debts. Less avocado toast, more payment of debts.
Epping Tescos now got a few more supplies, even got some mince and security guard enforcing queing up outside at least 2 metres apart so not too many in the store at any 1 time
Of course suppliers can sue if they want to. Fat lot of good it will do them if there's no business left to sue.
There was some derision posted about the mathematicians who queried the idea of herd immunity. But it was applied mathematics and they turned out to be right.
Who we pay attention to is an entirely different matter.
Of course, yes, now they may be bankrupt. That's up to the suppliers. If they accept the delay in payment, the company might survive and they might get paid. If they don't, it will probably go bankrupt and they definitely won't get paid.
He is in the same category as Ashley and if both lost everything I frankly do not care
But when those payments are likely to actually be made (as opposed to when employees qualify for them) is for now entirely unclear, as is how long they might last beyond the initial three months.
I don't hold any brief for Weatherspoons, dislike the proprietor intensely, and am not defending the decision to sack all those staff - but the situation is not clearcut.
If you think UK Ltd is in a position to pay its debts in the current circumstances you are in for a shock. Our bank sources say this is the worst they've seen with many companies have zero turnover in the last 2 weeks. You cant pay debts with no cash flow.
Admittedly, having Emma Dent Coad as candidate may have been a drawback.
But he does seem to have built up a bit of a cult following, is capable of getting funding, and operates on a very different model to XR. Different message too.
I was curious what you make of him, as a professional in the field with an academic angle. It strikes me that where XR have been successful largely aligns with your interests (getting people to take climate change seriously and potentially moving civil society towards enacting steps that might do something about it) and you've been lucky that their more extreme members, who depart from conventional science, haven't, as far as I can see, been quite so successful in the areas where they're misaligned with you. Politicians may pay more attention to messaging and opinion polls than to a scientific evidence base, but 'twas ever thus - and climate change academia still seems a place where a lot of level-headed scientists are pursuing careful, evidence-based approaches; they don't seem to be being purged or defunded en masse for "insufficient radicalism" to make way for politically-driven activist types who spout scientifically illiterate prophecies in the hope of capturing the public's or politicians' attention.
The "Deep Adaptation" crowd, with their pessimism that the most damaging levels of climate change can be avoided and suggested switch of effort to surviving our new reality, seem more fundamentally at odds with you (as I was sarcastically attempting to suggest). Their strategy of trying to gain a foothold within academia is interesting too - in ten years' time, how many geography departments will have bright young radical academics with PhDs in an autoethnographic account of my preparations to survive the imminent climate apocalpyse or similar? I meet quite a few young graduates on the humanities/social science side of things for whom this message seems to resonate.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.com/2015/05/2020-geography-of-labours-next-campaign.html
It stands up well. Jeremy Corbyn is not Labour's only problem.
https://twitter.com/nygovcuomo/status/1242842070554939395?s=21
Game change alert!!!!!
was available earlier to the UK government at the EU COVID19 information sharing meeting, but the government wasn't aware of it due to it boycotting that meeting for reasons of Brexit ideology.
You said the government did not have all the information because it did not attend this meeting. I find it surprising that such information would not be made widely available, rather than restricted to only the participants of the meeting. Hence why I asked for a source for the claim.
While it still holds big cities and university towns, it needs to win the suburbs if it is to return to government again
https://twitter.com/RichardVaughan1/status/1242809370020384768
Today's question is about Microveg grown indoors in my conservatory.
Two weeks ago I planted a seed tray with Spring Onions (LHS in pic below), and Parskey (RHS), using seeds from last year though still in date. The compost was the last from last year.
The Parsley is fine, but the Spring Onions are growing fungus. Is that likely to be the seeds or the compost, and do I need to throw that half of the tray away, and start again - I have both new seeds and new compost?
Thanks
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1242799620775907330
Other trays are doing better, though the next one of these needs more dense planting:
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1242800241797206017
If you use water from a rainbutt to water, don't - use tap water initially. The chlorine will help as a fungicide.
Yeah, that’s much safer.
Amazon has agreed to carry out distribution and the tests will also go on sale in chemist shops.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/uk-coronavirus-mass-home-testing-to-be-made-available-within-days
You aren't buying them from Amazon, they are distributing them to Boots. I guess you might get people trying to stockpile them, but hopefully Boots have some sensible system in place.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-52040205
...In a televised address on Tuesday, he called on mayors and governors to roll back restrictions they have introduced to curb the spread of Covid-19.
His intervention came as the two biggest cities - Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro - went into partial lockdown.
Brazil has reported 2,200 confirmed infections and 46 deaths.
“Our lives have to go on. Jobs must be kept... We must, yes, get back to normal,” Mr Bolsonaro said, in a speech that sparked protests across the country.
The president described restrictions on public transport, social-distancing measures, and closures of businesses and schools as “scorched-earth” policies.
He added that people aged over 60 were at risk, but that most people - including himself - had nothing to fear.
"With my history as an athlete, if I were infected with the virus I would have no reason to worry. I would feel nothing, or it would be at most just a little flu."..
Martin or his FD will be assuming that many of their creditors will renegotiate as they will be terrified of losing their sizable contracts. Such is business in this sector. Unfortunately.
Their lives are potentially miserable, or worse, at the moment.
Another "might require you to go somewhere like Boots because it requires a blood prick", she added.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-game-changer-covid-19-tests-could-be-available-in-days-mps-told-11963509
I presume the easy way to stop stockpiling if you have to provide things like ID to buy one, as they need that to be able to know who in order to process it anyway....and I bet the government want to know all sort of demographic info.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238578-uk-has-enough-intensive-care-units-for-coronavirus-expert-predicts/