Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer needs a net gain of 124 seats at the next GE to win a

1356789

Comments

  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    Insignificant or something no one wants to take on. Northern Ireland it is.
    He could be the new Dawn Butler - Shadow Minister for sitting next to the Leader
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    It will be very disappointing if a fatuous twerp like Burgon is not fully shown to the door.
  • BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    It will be very disappointing if a fatuous twerp like Burgon is not fully shown to the door.
    no, no, no, he's got to stay front and centre. He speaks to that 17 and a bit per cent of the country that no normal politician can reach.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    It will be very disappointing if a fatuous twerp like Burgon is not fully shown to the door.
    Wouldn’t he need to be physically guided through it, just to be safe?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Barry G gone.

    I know he has a very poor rep on here, but from a personal perspective, I didn't despise the guy. It's just his position as a prominent shadow Secretary of State laid bare how empty Corbyn's party was of any talent.
    What time is Shami's exist? I wouldn't want to miss it.
    I suspect she might survive.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    On that news the average will go through the roof!
    What's your IQ Pete.

    I presume as you know everybody else's you dont have a problem sharing yours.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    It will be very disappointing if a fatuous twerp like Burgon is not fully shown to the door.
    Wouldn’t he need to be physically guided through it, just to be safe?
    ...and locked and bolted from the inside after his exit.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,442
    felix said:

    eadric said:
    Quite extraordinary. There must be people who could do the job as well as her. How can she appear on TV again? An odd misstep by Nicola.
    Press question to every behaviour recommendation she makes from now on: "Is this something you will be keeping to? Are you sure? Are you really sure, or do you think you will have an excuse not to?"
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    I don't think he can dare sack Burgon. He can shift him somewhere insignificant. But I doubt he will go completely.
    Minister for Sport, perhaps? Or Shadow Minister Without Portfolio?
    I'm disappointed. I was expecting a joke along the lines of having him join the Burgeoning ranks of sacked Shadow Ministers.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Will someone alert me when Lord Falconer resigns?

    My understanding is that the press are setting up camp aroungd his home now - but fear he may call the Police on them for breaking the lockdown. This may be the excuse needed to delay his resignation.....
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    On that news the average will go through the roof!
    What's your IQ Pete.

    I presume as you know everybody else's you dont have a problem sharing yours.
    If I knew BJO I would gladly share it with you. Lower than Burgon's I expect, but I am still happy to see the back of him.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    "All commercial flights between Sweden and the UK will be suspended from the afternoon of Thursday 9th April until further notice, according to The British Embassy in Sweden."

    https://www.thelocal.se/20200405/flights-between-sweden-and-uk-to-be-suspended
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
    Yeah, the method of acquiring immunity might be either getting it and surviving or being vaccinated. The end result is the same.
    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
    They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
    Smallpox had >10x the CFR of Covid 19, survived 12 millennia and did not die out because it ran out of hosts.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
    I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
    That seems a little premature. The pattern of COVID19 is a deteriation after 7-10 days, the SARDS seems to be a late phenomenon in general.

  • ydoethur said:

    eadric said:
    "The second is one of the most memorable pieces I have ever read in The Spectator. It is from 2003 and is in that bucket of pieces that at the time – and still – I think ‘Gosh I can’t believe we ran that, but I’m glad we did’."

    I'd guess it's safe to assume that everbody will already have been aware that SeanT is an obsessive wanker.
    The two pertinent questions to ask right now may be "how does the publishing of this 'piece' reflect on the Spectator editorship at that time" and "how much do we have to worry about granny and the swans".
    I can’t access the article. Was that the one about him and the Danish porn, or the one about the Thai prostitute’s autograph?
    "In a few weeks I had sourced a lot of websites that were much better than The Hun; sites with literally tens of thousands of categorised images of everything under the sexual sun: interracial porn, Japanese cartoon porn, women-smoking-on-the-toilet porn. It was a cornucopia, available 24/7."
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065

    guybrush said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    Very well summarised, hard to really pick holes in this analysis. Ugly indeed.
    Also, whatever South Korea is doing seems to be working, so maybe throwing money and manpower at that will keep deaths to a minimum while allowing some form of normality to return?
    I am sadly of the opinion that more people will die in Britain as a direct or indirect consequence of the lockdown and the shredding of the economy than will die as a result of CV-19. We already know that people are dying because of disruption to their treatment, because of suicides and because they are alone with no one to look after them.

    The trouble is that saying more will die as a result of the 'cure' compared to the disease does not take into account what would have happened if we had not instigated the 'cure'. I am inclined to believe the ICL numbers about how many would have died without a lockdown. But I am still uncomfortable with the fact that we are, to large extent, acting as if the lockdown is victimless.
    I agree that people who consider a lockdown is victimless are being foolish, but Idoubt there really are many people who think that. However, I am sadly of the opinion that without sthe current levels of social distancing thesituation in western Europe in Mid-April would be a genuine disaster zone, and much worse than we we will see with the current measures.

    FInally your comment about people having disrupted treatment for non-covid illnesses; that situation would be an order of magnitude worse if no action were taken slow the outbreak.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    That is one of the all time great charts. Look at Corbyn inching out Churchill there.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
    Yeah, the method of acquiring immunity might be either getting it and surviving or being vaccinated. The end result is the same.
    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.
    Of course. Unfortunately, it's not currently available.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385
    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
    I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
    That seems a little premature. The pattern of COVID19 is a deteriation after 7-10 days, the SARDS seems to be a late phenomenon in general.

    Well I genuinely hope he is recovering well.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    On that news the average will go through the roof!
    What's your IQ Pete.

    I presume as you know everybody else's you dont have a problem sharing yours.
    If I knew BJO I would gladly share it with you. Lower than Burgon's I expect, but I am still happy to see the back of him.
    Thanks Pete.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    Vaccine is a method of herd immunity, not an alternative to it.
    Yeah, the method of acquiring immunity might be either getting it and surviving or being vaccinated. The end result is the same.
    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.
    Of course. Unfortunately, it's not currently available.
    True.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    kinabalu said:

    That is one of the all time great charts. Look at Corbyn inching out Churchill there.

    Well, shouldn't we compare Churchill's first attempt (1950) with Corbyn's first?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    edited April 2020
    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:
    That's the first time that I have seen ethnicity feature in a UK report. Asians and Black look over represented. Possibly due to the worst hotspots being in London and the West Midlands, but noteworthy nevertheless. Alternatively could relate to high rates of diabetes and CVS disease in those groups. Outcomes still looking grim for those needing advanced respiratory support.
    Even in quieter times, if you need advanced respiratory support, for whatever reason, your odds are not looking that great.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Andy_JS said:

    Just read this article in the print edition of the Sunday Times.

    (£)

    "JONATHAN SUMPTION
    Coronavirus lockdown: we are so afraid of death, no one even asks whether this ‘cure’ is actually worse"

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-lockdown-we-are-so-afraid-of-death-no-one-even-asks-whether-this-cure-is-actually-worse-3t97k66vj

    Except that people are constantly asking "is the cure actually worse?".

    You can hardly get through 5 minutes without hearing that.
  • BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884
    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385

    ydoethur said:

    The average IQ figure for the Shadow Cabinet has just increased dramatically.
    Why? Has he sacked Burgon too?
    On that news the average will go through the roof!
    What's your IQ Pete.

    I presume as you know everybody else's you dont have a problem sharing yours.
    If I knew BJO I would gladly share it with you. Lower than Burgon's I expect, but I am still happy to see the back of him.
    Thanks Pete.

    I am really quite excited, under dreadful general circumstances, that we have someone who looks like he can provide a sensible alternative to the Conservatives and give them a run for their money in more normal times.

    A dream ticket of RLB and Burgon would not have been given any credibility to do that. And for an educated man Burgon seems to be completely devoid of common-sense and self awareness.
  • ydoethur said:

    One thing Starmer has is that the way the cards fall, the 124th seat isn't ridiculously safe (5.25% swing required). A 6% swing would probably deliver a reasonable majority.

    No, it’s a 10% swing required.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    This is target 124:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_North_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

    The SNP hold it by 49% to 28%.

    A 5.25% takes Filton and Bradley Stoke, target no. 59. That would still be a greater swing than Thatcher managed.
    Not entirely sure the usual rules apply, such was Corbyn's toxicity. The inability to recapture Scotland is a massive and likely insurmountable hurdle for any future Labour majority to be reached. A minority Labour Government sans Corbyn is not beyond possibility next time.

    As TSE has pointed out Covid-19 changes everything, and to who's advantage is anyone's guess.
    As ever, a recipe for a catastrophic mess. The main enablers for a Labour minority are likely to be the SNP, who will insist on a second referendum.

    The UK Government could very well end up trying to negotiate the dissolution of the UK with the SNP, whilst being propped up (until the point that this is completed) by... the SNP.
    Isn't that what did for the Liberals? They had support from the Irish Nationalists for their Home Rule policy, then lost power after Ireland got Home Rule?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
    Not pensions - welfare. Most of the money AIUI came from a fund to compensate miners with pneumoconiosis, but as hardly any of them were still alive it all went to union funds.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    HYUFD said:
    Mr Ukip has a point. Why is being in the park standing up OK but lying down not?
    Because you can lie down in your own home! The rules are that you can go out to exercise.

    The impenetrable thickness of some people never ceases to amaze me.
    If going to the park is dangerous, ban it. If it is not, then let people sunbathe. The trouble with inconsistent regulations is people misunderstand them, and so inadvertently break them.
    And still you're too thick to understand, even after it's been spelled out in words of one syllable!
    The problem is that we're dealing with people who, if you can believe it, are stupider than you.

    These people look to the letter of the law to determine how they act and are incapable of making the self-evident, glaringly obvious interpretations of the law that people such as yourself are able to do.

    Pity them, don't hate them.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    felix said:

    It would have been strange indeed to keep him on, even without considering which wing in the party he represents.
    Bang go the Haileburians.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
    They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
    Smallpox had >10x the CFR of Covid 19, survived 12 millennia and did not die out because it ran out of hosts.
    I wasn’t being entirely serious. The bit where I suggested it was capable of conscious thought hopefully indicates that.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Just read this article in the print edition of the Sunday Times.

    (£)

    "JONATHAN SUMPTION
    Coronavirus lockdown: we are so afraid of death, no one even asks whether this ‘cure’ is actually worse"

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-lockdown-we-are-so-afraid-of-death-no-one-even-asks-whether-this-cure-is-actually-worse-3t97k66vj

    Except that people are constantly asking "is the cure actually worse?".

    You can hardly get through 5 minutes without hearing that.
    And we are not simply "afraid of death;" we are afraid of multiple excess deaths overwhelming the health care system and producing complete chaos and societal breakdown. I am sure Lord S is a clever cookie but he sounds in this instance like Peter Hitchens's less intelligent twin.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622
    kle4 said:

    Mmm, just had some lovely Christmas Pudding. And people thought I was silly to keep a whole bunch back in December - they will last until at least March 2021, so I've easily sorted.

    But what did you have with it ?

    I prefer ice cream.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,507
    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    DougSeal said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in the community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
    They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
    Smallpox had >10x the CFR of Covid 19, survived 12 millennia and did not die out because it ran out of hosts.
    I wasn’t being entirely serious. The bit where I suggested it was capable of conscious thought hopefully indicates that.
    It should have done; the trouble is that the likes of Richard Dawkins, who I read quite a lot of, routinely use language like "the gene wants x to happen" to mean "x happening selects for the gene." A bad habit in my view.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    A vaccine is the way of getting herd immunity with fewer casualties. Unless there is a sudden scientific breakthrough we have to assume that the lock down will be eased when the advisers are confident that the health system can cope. I assume they hope they can fine tune infection rates as measures are slowly eased. The vulnerable will continue in greater isolation for the foreseeable. Eventually the combination of greater social isolation even after lock down is eased plus more immune people in thhas to do with e community will mean that it will burn out. Of course mutations may confound this and extend the struggle.
    They may but if Covid-19 has any sense will mutate to stop killing its hosts for its own survival
    Smallpox had >10x the CFR of Covid 19, survived 12 millennia and did not die out because it ran out of hosts.
    Yes, I wonder how much the rise of the anti-vaxx movement has to do with parents being too young have lived through the eradication of Smallpox (world wide) and Polio (in western countries)
  • BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
    Not pensions - welfare. Most of the money AIUI came from a fund to compensate miners with pneumoconiosis, but as hardly any of them were still alive it all went to union funds.
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
    Not pensions - welfare. Most of the money AIUI came from a fund to compensate miners with pneumoconiosis, but as hardly any of them were still alive it all went to union funds.
    cheers, appreciate the detail.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,000
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Just read this article in the print edition of the Sunday Times.

    (£)

    "JONATHAN SUMPTION
    Coronavirus lockdown: we are so afraid of death, no one even asks whether this ‘cure’ is actually worse"

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-lockdown-we-are-so-afraid-of-death-no-one-even-asks-whether-this-cure-is-actually-worse-3t97k66vj

    Except that people are constantly asking "is the cure actually worse?".

    You can hardly get through 5 minutes without hearing that.
    Another string to the 'we contrarians with our edgy uncomfortable views are constantly being gagged' bow. Scientific studies have found that there can be as many as 749 published articles espousing these views on any given day.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
    Not pensions - welfare. Most of the money AIUI came from a fund to compensate miners with pneumoconiosis, but as hardly any of them were still alive it all went to union funds.
    Far be it for me to defend Lavery but didn't compensation revert to next of kin in the event of prior-bereavement? Assuming a claim was made.

  • Hancock saying that even though he has had covid science has not yet decided if he is safe to disregard social distancing and until the science confirms he can ignore social distancing it will continue to apply

    Interesting comment
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385
    edited April 2020

    Hancock saying that even though he has had covid science has not yet decided if he is safe to disregard social distancing and until the science confirms he can ignore social distancing it will continue to apply

    Interesting comment

    A decent guy.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
    No idea. Pretty sure somebody who makes the same mistakes repeatedly and appears to be incapable of remembering basic facts or formulating simple sentences doesn’t have a high one. I genuinely am puzzled that he got into Cambridge.

    Mine is 144, if you’re particularly interested.
  • ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    You mean they missed it
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Hancock properly dodges question on Scottish CMO - matter for the Scottish government.
  • ABZABZ Posts: 441
    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    I think the answer is South Korea! They have managed to control the spread really well and new infections are ticking along in the background. As long as it stays in control (i.e., contacts are traced rapidly upon someone being infected) and testing is high there's no reason to assume it will become unmanageable.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    Sounded like a technical glitch. I seriously doubt it was intentional.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    Scary times.

    I hope the vaccine comes sooner than we all think it will.

    Have we got people with the highest IQs on this?

    I presume some PBers could identify them if not.
  • RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    Sounded like a technical glitch. I seriously doubt it was intentional.
    Now being replayed from start live on Sky
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
    No idea. Pretty sure somebody who makes the same mistakes repeatedly and appears to be incapable of remembering basic facts or formulating simple sentences doesn’t have a high one. I genuinely am puzzled that he got into Cambridge.

    Mine is 144, if you’re particularly interested.
    That is gross
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,622
    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    Its likely that most of the 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months would have died anyway.

    A bit brutal but has to be considered.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,464

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    DougSeal said:

    The NE miners vote is lost! Oh wait... already gone!
    Who are these miners of which you speak?
    Ian Lavery was the last of them. That’s why he was able to use all their accumulated union subs to buy his house and get a massive redundancy payment for resigning.
    you telling me the miners' pension fund was a tontine?
    Not pensions - welfare. Most of the money AIUI came from a fund to compensate miners with pneumoconiosis, but as hardly any of them were still alive it all went to union funds.
    Far be it for me to defend Lavery but didn't compensation revert to next of kin in the event of prior-bereavement? Assuming a claim was made.

    Some, IIRC, went to care home companies.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    Sounded like a technical glitch. I seriously doubt it was intentional.
    I am sure it was a technical glitch.

    Not ideal though I presume we probably get it in full later.
  • philiph said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
    No idea. Pretty sure somebody who makes the same mistakes repeatedly and appears to be incapable of remembering basic facts or formulating simple sentences doesn’t have a high one. I genuinely am puzzled that he got into Cambridge.

    Mine is 144, if you’re particularly interested.
    That is gross
    The boasting or The Burgon?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    edited April 2020

    ydoethur said:

    One thing Starmer has is that the way the cards fall, the 124th seat isn't ridiculously safe (5.25% swing required). A 6% swing would probably deliver a reasonable majority.

    No, it’s a 10% swing required.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour

    This is target 124:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_North_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

    The SNP hold it by 49% to 28%.

    A 5.25% takes Filton and Bradley Stoke, target no. 59. That would still be a greater swing than Thatcher managed.
    Not entirely sure the usual rules apply, such was Corbyn's toxicity. The inability to recapture Scotland is a massive and likely insurmountable hurdle for any future Labour majority to be reached. A minority Labour Government sans Corbyn is not beyond possibility next time.

    As TSE has pointed out Covid-19 changes everything, and to who's advantage is anyone's guess.
    As ever, a recipe for a catastrophic mess. The main enablers for a Labour minority are likely to be the SNP, who will insist on a second referendum.

    The UK Government could very well end up trying to negotiate the dissolution of the UK with the SNP, whilst being propped up (until the point that this is completed) by... the SNP.
    Isn't that what did for the Liberals? They had support from the Irish Nationalists for their Home Rule policy, then lost power after Ireland got Home Rule?
    No. Lots of things did for the Liberals. They were blamed for the length and damage of the First World War (unfairly, but every party in power in 1914 was swiftly removed during the war or immediately afterwards). They were hampered by changes to the franchise which gave the vote to women (who voted Conservative) and younger men (who tended to vote Labour). They were also severely damaged by a series of splits - most pertinently the intensely personal one between Lloyd George and Asquith, which reduced them to third party status in 1918. The wipeout of the Irish Nationalists and the granting of an Irish Parliament from 1922 were more aftershocks than causes of the decline.

    But it’s worth remembering after 1885 the Liberals only won one election in their own strength (1906) - and that was when sometimes as many as three Unionists standing in one constituency for one vote.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751

    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
    I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
    That seems a little premature. The pattern of COVID19 is a deteriation after 7-10 days, the SARDS seems to be a late phenomenon in general.

    Well I genuinely hope he is recovering well.
    Wouldn't he be whisked into hospital at the first sign of danger?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    What proportion of asymptomatic cases are you assuming?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    Its likely that most of the 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months would have died anyway.

    A bit brutal but has to be considered.
    Depends how many of those deaths were caused by the NHS being overwhelmed and not able to deal with other emergencies.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    edited April 2020

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    You mean they missed it
    There was no feed to any of them.

    Like Rob said not deliberate but no they didnt accidentally all miss it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    DougSeal said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    I don't think the lockdown can continue for more than 3 or 4 months. Johnson probably understands that. Let's hope the Swedish experiment proves successful.
    As the three month furlough ends, a lot of people will find they don't have jobs to come back to as either their employer has downsized or gone to the wall entirely. And they will not be able to pay their rent or mortgage the next month.

    At the moment, we are in a state of collective denial about this. One of the government's top scientific advisers was in the Times only yesterday saying that ultimately, there is no alternative on the table to herd immunity.

    A vaccine is unlikely to be ready for a year or more and we cannot afford to spend that long in lockdown without bankrupting ourselves and risking real social disorder.

    A short lockdown to allow the NHS to increase capacity, followed by a year of social distancing measures, and gradual herd immunity is the least-worst way forward.

    People will die. It will be ugly and it will scar our collective psyche for a generation. But there is no other choice.

    Nobody wants to think about that right now, as the government pays them 80% of their wages to take a holiday. But when the money runs out, the music stops.
    As someone in the Telegraph pointed out, it could be years before a vaccine is found.
    there are - famous - viral diseases still without vaccines.
    I don’t think herd immunity ever went away as a policy goal TBH
    oh, I don't either: it remains one of the few options we have to get out of this
    Who is this 'we'? Herd immunity is great for survivors, but not optimal for those who succumb. We need a vaccine!

    As Boris is already on the herd immunity bus, he could well now ask the conductor to ring the bell! I hope not...
    I think you're being both naïve and partisan here. Its an easy to ignore mix.
    I wasn't trying to be partisan. Boris, practically speaking is personally out of the woods as far as Covid-19 is concerned.
    That seems a little premature. The pattern of COVID19 is a deteriation after 7-10 days, the SARDS seems to be a late phenomenon in general.

    Well I genuinely hope he is recovering well.
    Wouldn't he be whisked into hospital at the first sign of danger?
    Can you imagine the outcry given the questioning over the mere fact he and the health secretary had a test?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    Hancock saying that even though he has had covid science has not yet decided if he is safe to disregard social distancing and until the science confirms he can ignore social distancing it will continue to apply

    Interesting comment

    A very sensible comment. Until we know otherwise beeter to be safe. It amazes me the number of self-appointed experts there are out there who could have saved the world from all of this if only we had listened to them......they'd have provided the right strategy in advance to this disease, have provided the best word perfect guidance and rules in advance...they'd have made no errors in advance if only we'd followed them earlier. Why on earth were we all so silly?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424

    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    Scary times.

    I hope the vaccine comes sooner than we all think it will.

    Have we got people with the highest IQs on this?

    I presume some PBers could identify them if not.
    As I understand, there has never been a vaccine for any form of coronavirus. So I will not be holding my breath.

    (Admittedly, that might stop me catching the virus, but at the cost of my dying from suffocation which would defeat the object.)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,932

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    You mean they missed it
    There was no feed to any of them.

    Like Rob said not deliberate but no they didnt accidentally all miss it.
    Dom's plan to cut out the broadcasters?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    philiph said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
    No idea. Pretty sure somebody who makes the same mistakes repeatedly and appears to be incapable of remembering basic facts or formulating simple sentences doesn’t have a high one. I genuinely am puzzled that he got into Cambridge.

    Mine is 144, if you’re particularly interested.
    That is gross
    The boasting or The Burgon?
    144
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    RobD said:
    I think my answer would be, if she’s been recused from her job why is there still an objection to sacking her?
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,507
    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    I think the hope is that by spreading the 3m hospital admissions over a longer period the health service never gets overwhelmed and the number of deaths is lower. I cant pretend to know the numbers tho.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    RobD said:
    Absolutely. It makes things even worse than keeping her fully in post. Now she gets to keep her job - and gets to hide.

    Sturgeon putting friendship ahead of country.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,751
    edited April 2020

    Hancock saying that even though he has had covid science has not yet decided if he is safe to disregard social distancing and until the science confirms he can ignore social distancing it will continue to apply

    Interesting comment

    "It would be really embarrassing if I infected someone soon after coming out of isolation after only seven days, so I'm not going to take the chance."
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    IshmaelZ said:

    philiph said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Thanks ydoethur.
    12,000 is almost double what we had in ICU wards a month ago and a good 4,000 up on the total including in Theatres. So that's good progress if we already have 12,000.
    What's Burgons IQ BTW?
    I see you mentioned him departing will lead to a significant increase.

    Just interested to know, thanks in advance.
    No idea. Pretty sure somebody who makes the same mistakes repeatedly and appears to be incapable of remembering basic facts or formulating simple sentences doesn’t have a high one. I genuinely am puzzled that he got into Cambridge.

    Mine is 144, if you’re particularly interested.
    That is gross
    The boasting or The Burgon?
    144
    I was trying to think of a pun on Bilbo Baggins there, but I couldn’t.

    If it had been about the gardener, I would have managed in Sam wise.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    kinabalu said:

    The latter seems a better bet than getting it and potentially not surviving.

    By my rough estimate herd immunity without vaccine costs 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths.

    Therefore if we assume no vaccine the challenge is how best to manage 3,000,000 hospital admissions and 250,000 deaths over the next 18 months.

    But I could be missing something. Sure I am. Hope so anyway.
    Scary times.

    I hope the vaccine comes sooner than we all think it will.

    Have we got people with the highest IQs on this?

    I presume some PBers could identify them if not.
    I believe they're looking for guinea pigs - maybe some former shadow cabinet members may be tempted to offer their services.....
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    Sir Keir Starmer has sacked Barry Gardiner, FOR SHAME.

    https://twitter.com/BarryGardiner/status/1246805606939463681

    Can't say I'm pleased to hear this. Barry Gardiners do not grow on trees.

    Typically classy response. Hope we still get to see him from time to time.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    Scott_xP said:
    Dodds is awful. She has no presence, no panache, no flair.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    Scott_xP said:
    Better late than never. Still a little odd to keep her at all - there must be plenty of competent alternatives.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    edited April 2020
    Scott_xP said:
    Interesting lineup. Looking at Dodds and Reeves, I am reminded of the Republican commentator who sneered the Democrats had picked ‘a kangaroo ticket - stronger in the hindquarters [VP, Garner] than in the head.’

    However, since the ‘head’ in question remains the only man ever to win more than two Presidential elections, it may be that Starmer is right and I am wrong. After all, he knows them both personally.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    One unpleasant thing this lockdown has brought out is the verve by which fellow Britons love policing the actions of others.

    I find it rather distasteful.

    Yes I’m inclined to agree. Grassing was something to be ashamed of not so long agon
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    ydoethur said:

    Has Hancock given a figure for the number of ventilators we have and need, this morning?

    I think he said we had twelve thousand, and didn’t need thirty thousand any more but didn’t say how many we were expected to need. It wasn’t easy to tell because he was getting so confused.
    Think he said aiming for 18k.
    That sounds good.

    I see Broadcasters complaining the first part of todays daily briefing was not made available to them today.
    You mean they missed it
    There was no feed to any of them.

    Like Rob said not deliberate but no they didnt accidentally all miss it.
    Dom's plan to cut out the broadcasters?
    Wouldnt have thought so. It's on BBC now.

    I see one of the first questions was about when will we have 18,000 ventilators as next week is expected to be peak NHS pressure..
    Dont think a proper answer was given unless I missed it.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454
    Scott_xP said:
    PPE (Oxon)
    Newcastle then Birkbeck
    PPE (Oxon)
    PPE (Oxon)

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    Scott_xP said:
    There's a shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster? How does that work, do they only shadow the various things the Chancellor might do, which is varied, or is it just a way to get another Shadow Cabinet role without portfolio not necessarily shadowing the Chancellor?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:
    I think my answer would be, if she’s been recused from her job why is there still an objection to sacking her?
    From now on I suspect she will be working from....er..one of her homes during the week and another at the weekends? :smiley:
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    eadric said:
    Yes, it's a great read. Lapped it up.

    What it doesn't say is whether he was into spanking or being spanked.

    Minor quibble though.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    I think Ydoethur may be unwell, as he has admitted he could not think of a pun.

    Stay safe!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    Scott_xP said:
    PPE (Oxon)
    Newcastle then Birkbeck
    PPE (Oxon)
    PPE (Oxon)

    Oxford PPE centrists back with a vengeance then, not one of Corbyn's top team went to Oxford or did PPE (though Abbott did English at Cambridge)
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,424
    kle4 said:

    I think Ydoethur may be unwell, as he has admitted he could not think of a pun.

    Stay safe!

    My awesome pun on Mr Gamgee was insufficient?
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    Scott_xP said:
    Seems utterly bizarre to appoint Nandy (who has much to contribute to the domestic agenda) to a position where she is not going to be able to develop that important set of policies.

    As for Dodds and Thomas-Symonds - there is nothing inspiring about either of them. They are better than the idiots they are replacing - but that isn't saying much.
This discussion has been closed.