Why? Because the cult have decided to try and nuke the entire site from orbit having been forced to take off.
I know that Nick P doesn't want to get involved and I get that - but he is involved. The fight has been brought, and there simply isn't a way to square the circle when you have Labour members bereft of sanity. They literally believe their revisionist nonsense about 2016 and 2017 and in 2019 when its all their fault they attack the voters as being to blame.
Unless compromise can be found then its binary - stay or go. I went. Now that the loons are in orbit I have come back. And they need to be dispatched and quickly because this will never ever end.
Is there a book on the timing of the first sacking from the shadow ministerial team?
Starmer needs to get brutal.
MPs have signed a demand which would leave the party literally bankrupt. There isn't the need for further discussion. Remove the whip from them all. They brought the fight, no point trying to obfuscate around it.
Why are you such an angry man? Can you not conceive why a wing of Labour is so distressed to find that their close running campaigns were neutered by senior administrators. Tranches of funding used with no oversight, and favoured MPs given preferential access to money. There is even evidence of campaign data not being provided to those on the ground. This had a real effect on the 2017 campaign.
Can you not see that this is systemic nepotism and it will cost the entity the trust of a significant percentage of its dues paying members?
Your partisan comments on this site suggest that you see this as a war and you will not be happy until these MPs are removed. IMO this makes you no different from the Momentumites calling for mandatory reselection. You are the worst kind of party man, one that can only view the issue through their own prism and refuse to accept that labour will have a left wing element. No doubt, you will again leave the party when it won't conform to your blinkered sectarianism.
Of course the report could just be another delusional exercise in self-justification by the Corbynistas explaining why nothing was their fault.
I have rejoined in order to support Starmer candidates in NEC elections. Sir Keir needs to do what Kinnock did with Militant, publicly boot out Milne, Formby and co to make it crystal clear to voters that the party is no longer controlled by the Corbynites.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
And the skies! The weather! I don't know to what extent this is linked to lack of aeroplanes (surely it can't be that simple?), but every time the planes are grounded (2001, 2010, 2020) seems to coincide with glorious, cloudless skies. I recognise there is a massive and unsustainable cost to this idyll, but it would be nice to preserve some aspects of it when and if normal life resumes.
Sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence, but, in the right meteorological conditions, planes can be responsible for a lot of cirrus cloud, which can make an otherwise cloudless day more than a little hazy.
Worth noting that this April is currently vying with the April of the Cambridge's Royal Wedding (2011) to be the warmest in the Central England Temperature record (since 1659) and air traffic was pretty normal in 2011.
Yes, granted. Though it doesn't feel that warm in South Manchester! It is however beautiful, clear and cloudless. I don't know how this compares to the last twenty years, but it feels remarkable.
However it compares, your first seven words are still relevant!
As for astrology, I am not a subscriber, but it is perfectly possible that the movement of celestial bodies has a greater impact on the lives of humans than is measurable currently. .
Is it also perfectly possible that person best qualified to interpret this phenomenon is Russell fucking Grant?
Why should I not be surprised that a supporter/believer of Brexit also believes in astrology.
Actually Remain voters were more likely to believe in Astrology than Leave voters (12% vs 8%).
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
Arthur Scargill's Socialist Labour Party was set up after Blair won the Labour leadership in 1994 and Clause IV was repealed of cause
Heard his comments. Shocked. Never liked the guy - unpleasant vibe to him - but had not realized he was an actual dumbo. Probably has to go now. Shame for him, of course, but I think the rest of us will cope. He doesn't do anything that Richard Madeley can't do ten times better.
I am always interested by people who think that science is part of buffet -
"Hmmm.... I'll take a slice of Global Warming, a side of Gloop and for desert some Astrology"
A rather odd view. Do you confine your life's philosophy to the works of a single writer (and presumably from only one time in their life, since writers often change their mind over time)?
Truth is many sided. If you think of it as a statue, not a traffic light, it is perfectly possible to have several different views and angles on the truth, which could even be vigorously opposed, but could be equally true.
Global warming is a matter of science and evidence.
Gloop and Astrology are anti-scientific, proven bullshit.
I have no idea what Gloop is. As for astrology, I am not a subscriber, but it is perfectly possible that the movement of celestial bodies has a greater impact on the lives of humans than is measurable currently. Or not. If you'd told the scientists of the 18th century that our bodies consisted largely of tiny living cells and organisms you would have attracted derision. It is foolish to believe that science will not reveal more mysteries in the future along similar lines.
Even practitioners of Astrology can't give a vaguely coherent reason why it should work.
As for Gloop - Google it.
But they don't have to. As an example, look at the making of fermented foods like sauerkraut. Incredibly healthy, because they make nutrients more bioavailable, they introduce friendly bacteria into the gut, etc. ect. Our ancestors knew none of this. They were just preserving produce, and knew they felt well when they ate the result. This is 'wisdom' - doing something you don't necessarily understand the mechanics of, because you know it will result in a desirable outcome. I am not saying that applies to astrology, but I am saying we can subscribe to beliefs without knowing the science of how they work. Faith belongs in the same category. You are not rejecting science, you're just accepting of the fact that the science of something is not currently measurable.
There's a difference between being measurable, and understanding the mechanism by which it works. Or put another way, we can investigate whether it works without needing to think about why it works.
There's nothing stopping astrologers offering testable predictions which we could use to investigate whether they work. They have collectively failed to do so. If they ever manage to, we can then throw some resources into figuring out why all known laws of physics have stopped working.
I think it is unrealistic to expect that an objective measure could ever be put into place and be widely accepted.
Why? One astrologer, one prediction, under controlled conditions. If it works, it'll be studied, and people will try and replicate the results and build on them. That's how science works.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
That implies the reasoning why labour did so well, or so bad is purely something which labour controls. It wasn't. The Tory offering in 2017 (being May, and her disaster of a campaign both policy wise and personally), masked many issues for labour.
Also, Corbyn in 2017 wasn't Corbyn in 2019. The public were far more forgiving on him.
George Orwell was a left-wing libertarian. Are there any well-known and/or influential left-wing libertarians in the Labour Party today? I can't think of any.
I'm not really a fan of retrofitting folk with descriptions post mortem; afaik Orwell described himself as a democratic socialist until his death.
It can be overdone, true, but people are sometimes pretty bad at self labelling so how they think of themselves is not accurate.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
Hang on. This "report" alleges that the then HQ team actively conspired against the leader. And delivered +30 seats. The left didn't take over until 2019 when the result was -60.
EDIT: In 2017 the professional Southside team worked to firstly defend Labour seats against the Tory threat where internal polls showed them taking seats like West Bromwich East. Then the agenda swung in a once-in-a-generation event as the Tories imploded their own campaign. We know that people were willing to vote Labour to stop Brexit. In 2019 the professionals had gone and instead Labour targeted all kinds of silly seats and chose to send activists into seats like Cities and Finchely to wreck the traitors.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
Labour didn't do well in 2017. They lost. They didn't lose as badly as 2019 because no one then thought Corbyn was a threat, so many perhaps voted for Labour as a method of reducing the predicted TMay landslide. Corbyn was a disaster for Labour and a disaster for the country as his inept "leadership" enabled the election of one of the most right wing populist governments in recent history that has been able to pretend that it's victory was an endorsement of its Brexit strategy, when in reality it was a "Jeremy Corbyn-no-thanks" election.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
Fundamentally, Labour have the same problem the Tories had last year. Both parties like to talk about being "big tent" but there are limits as to how far you can stretch that.
In the end, to unite the Tory party either the hardcore leavers or the hardcore remainers had to go to finally end the civil war on Europe (it ended up with the hardcore remainers leaving).
In the same way to unite Labour, either the hardcore Corbynites or the hardcore Blairites have to go. It initially looked like the Blairites would leave with the foundation of the TIGs. Now it looks like the Corbynites have to go.
That doesn't mean a purge and it doesn't mean everyone on the left has to leave but those who can't be reconciled to the direction of travel, will have to go (hopefully of their own volition). Bearing in mind a lot of them were previously in the Greens or Socialist Workers and tend to live in ultra-safe Labour seats, it wouldn't be a great loss.
The chart is not particularly useful as it's impossible to see what the long-term damage is. Does the economy bounce back to where it was, or is it 5% smaller?
George Orwell was a left-wing libertarian. Are there any well-known and/or influential left-wing libertarians in the Labour Party today? I can't think of any.
I'm not really a fan of retrofitting folk with descriptions post mortem; afaik Orwell described himself as a democratic socialist until his death.
It can be overdone, true, but people are sometimes pretty bad at self labelling so how they think of themselves is not accurate.
Perhaps the best summary of Orwell's views was that he viewed the 1945 Labour Government as very, very good, but not perfect.
George Orwell was a left-wing libertarian. Are there any well-known and/or influential left-wing libertarians in the Labour Party today? I can't think of any.
There are if "libertarian" means strong on civil liberties and socially liberal. But if it means "small state", I would say very few if any. Indeed was Orwell a small stater? I wasn't aware that he was.
“That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”
― George Orwell
I think that quote was in a newspaper piece about the Home Guard.
'Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.'
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Not necessarily - there has been justified concern that stopping routine NHS operations/treatments will have an effect. Also, people are definitely not seeking out medical attention - possibly when it is required.
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Readers of Daniel Defoe will recognise this feature of the mortality statistics.
The chart is not particularly useful as it's impossible to see what the long-term damage is. Does the economy bounce back to where it was, or is it 5% smaller?
The bounce looks bigger. There are some real opportunities ahead here, I think it’s best to stop looking at the hit, but at what comes next instead. Robert’s post yesterday about the danger of crony capitalism and shoring up current wealth was on the money, it’s a time to let the new lead us instead.
Usual nationalist divisive lies. How long before Brexiteers try to excuse our terrible death rate compared to Germany by some similarly mendacious story about Germans/EU/foreigners?
Fundamentally, Labour have the same problem the Tories had last year. Both parties like to talk about being "big tent" but there are limits as to how far you can stretch that.
In the end, to unite the Tory party either the hardcore leavers or the hardcore remainers had to go to finally end the civil war on Europe (it ended up with the hardcore remainers leaving).
In the same way to unite Labour, either the hardcore Corbynites or the hardcore Blairites have to go. It initially looked like the Blairites would leave with the foundation of the TIGs. Now it looks like the Corbynites have to go.
That doesn't mean a purge and it doesn't mean everyone on the left has to leave but those who can't be reconciled to the direction of travel, will have to go (hopefully of their own volition). Bearing in mind a lot of them were previously in the Greens or Socialist Workers and tend to live in ultra-safe Labour seats, it wouldn't be a great loss.
I think the point about the limits of being big tent is something the parties need to take to heart
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
That implies the reasoning why labour did so well, or so bad is purely something which labour controls. It wasn't. The Tory offering in 2017 (being May, and her disaster of a campaign both policy wise and personally), masked many issues for labour.
Also, Corbyn in 2017 wasn't Corbyn in 2019. The public were far more forgiving on him.
Pundits underplay, I think, the impact of the terrorist attacks during the 2017 election campaign, which underscored May's police cuts and not in a good way. Look at the Conservative platform last year to see where Boris and CCHQ think 2017 went wrong and what they think May did right, like ducking debates.
In 2019, below-the-radar social media campaigning by (or rather on behalf of) the Conservatives is also underestimated and unexplored, along with my own theory of Corbyn's glasses.
As for astrology, I am not a subscriber, but it is perfectly possible that the movement of celestial bodies has a greater impact on the lives of humans than is measurable currently. .
Is it also perfectly possible that person best qualified to interpret this phenomenon is Russell fucking Grant?
Why should I not be surprised that a supporter/believer of Brexit also believes in astrology. Probably believes in fairies, pixies and Father Christmas also. lol.
In the quoted post above I state explicitly that I don't believe in it. Should we be surprised that a continuity remainer misses the blinking obvious?
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Not necessarily - there has been justified concern that stopping routine NHS operations/treatments will have an effect. Also, people are definitely not seeking out medical attention - possibly when it is required.
My guess would be that the uptick in deaths from other illnesses will be lagging by quite a bit - we'll probably see it in the data for the next few years at least, but it's unlikely to be discernible yet.
Reduction in road traffic deaths will be having an immediate impact, but in the other direction.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
I think the answer is the same for both elections - Brexit. In 17 it worked for Labour and in 19 against them. Run a GE with Corbyn Labour versus Generic Tory with no Brexit and I think they win 240 seats. So GE17 flatters them. But by the same token GE19 is too harsh a measure.
George Orwell was a left-wing libertarian. Are there any well-known and/or influential left-wing libertarians in the Labour Party today? I can't think of any.
I'm not really a fan of retrofitting folk with descriptions post mortem; afaik Orwell described himself as a democratic socialist until his death.
It can be overdone, true, but people are sometimes pretty bad at self labelling so how they think of themselves is not accurate.
If Orwell was to be defined by all the groups who want to co-opt him postmortem for their cause, he'd need to be called an anarcho libertarian, antifascist, anticommunist, British nationalist, English nationalist, unionist, Eurosceptic, Europhiliac, liberal, conservative socialist (and that's just a few of them).
I think I'll stick with the simpler self description.
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Not necessarily - there has been justified concern that stopping routine NHS operations/treatments will have an effect. Also, people are definitely not seeking out medical attention - possibly when it is required.
My guess would be that the uptick in deaths from other illnesses will be lagging by quite a bit - we'll probably see it in the data for the next few years at least, but it's unlikely to be discernible yet.
Reduction in road traffic deaths will be having an immediate impact, but in the other direction.
George Orwell was a left-wing libertarian. Are there any well-known and/or influential left-wing libertarians in the Labour Party today? I can't think of any.
I'm not really a fan of retrofitting folk with descriptions post mortem; afaik Orwell described himself as a democratic socialist until his death.
It can be overdone, true, but people are sometimes pretty bad at self labelling so how they think of themselves is not accurate.
If Orwell was to be defined by all the groups who want to co-opt him postmortem for their cause, he'd need to be called an anarcho, libertarian, antifascist, anticommunist, British nationalist, English nationalist, unionist, Eurosceptic, Europhiliac, liberal, conservative socialist (and that's just a few of them).
I think I'll stick with the simpler self description.
I wasnt making a point about Orwell specifically - I dont know enough about him to dispute his own labelling - just that retrofitted descriptions can potentially be reasonable particularly when politicians can be pretty shameless in claiming one position while embodying another.
And the skies! The weather! I don't know to what extent this is linked to lack of aeroplanes (surely it can't be that simple?), but every time the planes are grounded (2001, 2010, 2020) seems to coincide with glorious, cloudless skies. I recognise there is a massive and unsustainable cost to this idyll, but it would be nice to preserve some aspects of it when and if normal life resumes.
Sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence, but, in the right meteorological conditions, planes can be responsible for a lot of cirrus cloud, which can make an otherwise cloudless day more than a little hazy.
Worth noting that this April is currently vying with the April of the Cambridge's Royal Wedding (2011) to be the warmest in the Central England Temperature record (since 1659) and air traffic was pretty normal in 2011.
Yes, granted. Though it doesn't feel that warm in South Manchester! It is however beautiful, clear and cloudless. I don't know how this compares to the last twenty years, but it feels remarkable.
However it compares, your first seven words are still relevant!
I'm sure there will be some interesting papers soon on the cloud differences. We didn't have as good satellite observations when air traffic was last this low, so it makes for an interesting observational experiment.
Fundamentally I am calling for the removal of left wing nutters. The left are calling for the removal of right wing traitors. Both groups want the party to split.
So lets split. The Leader and the right wing traitors can stay as the Labour Party and win elections. The true left socialists can be real Labour or whatever and lose whatever deposits they can crowdfund. Everyone wins.
That works except that in 2017 the left wing nutters did better than the right wing traitors had in 2015 or 2010. Maybe we should take another look at the audacity theory someone posted the other day.
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
Labour didn't do well in 2017. They lost. They didn't lose as badly as 2019 because no one then thought Corbyn was a threat, so many perhaps voted for Labour as a method of reducing the predicted TMay landslide. Corbyn was a disaster for Labour and a disaster for the country as his inept "leadership" enabled the election of one of the most right wing populist governments in recent history that has been able to pretend that it's victory was an endorsement of its Brexit strategy, when in reality it was a "Jeremy Corbyn-no-thanks" election.
Trouble with that analysis is it does not explain the difference two years made, and blames Corbyn and not Corbynism. That might be correct but if so, the logical thing to have done was elect Rebecca Long-Bailey to succeed him. Indeed, Boris ran on large parts of Labour's 2017 platform so perhaps he agrees with you!
If it didn't look like that, you really would be asking about the need for the lockdown...
Thankfully not since records began. It would be interesting to see a comparison with the numbers for 1918-1919.
Interesting, but not necessarily that helpful. 1918 was a much less connected world, and Spanish flu (as best as we can tell) was less infectious than Covid-19. Plus I'd guess that requirements for registering deaths promptly were less stringent?
All of which, coupled with difficulties in separating out deaths due to the War (direct and indirect) at the start of the epidemic means you'd probably see less of an obvious peak and more of a continuous pattern of deaths in excess of the baseline. Although that baseline would presumably have to be taken as pre-1914, for obvious reasons.
Pundits underplay, I think, the impact of the terrorist attacks during the 2017 election campaign, which underscored May's police cuts and not in a good way. Look at the Conservative platform last year to see where Boris and CCHQ think 2017 went wrong and what they think May did right, like ducking debates.
In 2019, below-the-radar social media campaigning by (or rather on behalf of) the Conservatives is also underestimated and unexplored, along with my own theory of Corbyn's glasses.
The glasses were IMO not a trivial issue but were marginal. Cost maybe 5 seats.
On Topic I think you completely miss the point. There are lots of example of excusing AS if it was from one part of the party and deliberate dragging of heels on AS as a deliberate ploy
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
Option 1 I think. Probably too early for lockdown to be leading to more deaths than usual. If anything I think other deaths might be down a bit.
Option 2 is also significant. My daughter-in-law's father died of cancer in a Madrid hospital undergoing massive disruption due to CV19. Who's to say how much that disruption shortened his life?
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
No, absolutely not true. The conversation is the people DISCUSSING A CONSPIRACY THEORY about that. They absolutely did not say that is what they were doing.
Their conversation has been edited for the consumption of Twitter to make it seem like they were doing it. If you had actually read the full exchange you would know that was not true.
I think that [Orwell] quote was in a newspaper piece about the Home Guard.
'Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.'
Context etc.
The context here is whether Orwell would be comfortable in the modern Labour party. Can you imagine any of the major parties in the UK trusting normal people with a rifle?
I think that quote was in a newspaper piece about the Home Guard.
'Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.'
Context etc.
Phew!
Unfortunately 1984 and 'Farm' have already gone up in flames here. Not too late for 'Pier' and 'Aspidistra' though.
On Topic I think you completely miss the point. There are lots of example of excusing AS if it was from one part of the party and deliberate dragging of heels on AS as a deliberate ploy
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
If it didn't look like that, you really would be asking about the need for the lockdown...
Thankfully not since records began. It would be interesting to see a comparison with the numbers for 1918-1919.
Interesting, but not necessarily that helpful. 1918 was a much less connected world, and Spanish flu (as best as we can tell) was less infectious than Covid-19. Plus I'd guess that requirements for registering deaths promptly were less stringent?
All of which, coupled with difficulties in separating out deaths due to the War (direct and indirect) at the start of the epidemic means you'd probably see less of an obvious peak and more of a continuous pattern of deaths in excess of the baseline. Although that baseline would presumably have to be taken as pre-1914, for obvious reasons.
1918 was a very connected world thanks firstly to the Great War where infected recruits took the flu to the trenches, and then secondly to the end of the war and infected troops going home to countries all round the world.
The OBR forecasts just published make good reading for Sunak.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
On Topic I think you completely miss the point. There are lots of example of excusing AS if it was from one part of the party and deliberate dragging of heels on AS as a deliberate ploy
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
These people are racist apologists.
I find that an appealing story - principled left-wing campaigner undermined by traitorous Blairites. I so want it to be true.
I can't reconcile it with all the other facts available, though. What of the interventions by Corbyn's office to stop expulsions of specific individuals, to give just one example?
My mother-in-law was very upset when my father-in-law's death certificate had "smoking" on it. I don't suppose consistency is possible on this kind of thing.
OBR: Britain faces biggest budget deficit since WW2 The Office for Budget Responsibility has warned that borrowing could surge to £273bn this year, equivalent to 14pc of GDP – far outstripping the peak deficit of 10pc in the financial crisis.
I think that [Orwell] quote was in a newspaper piece about the Home Guard.
'Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.'
Context etc.
The context here is whether Orwell would be comfortable in the modern Labour party. Can you imagine any of the major parties in the UK trusting normal people with a rifle?
Those in care homes that are identified as COVID are already in the figures BUT I imagine that older people are less likely to be tested for or identified as having COVID at the date of their death and that will likely be the case for many care homes.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Not necessarily - there has been justified concern that stopping routine NHS operations/treatments will have an effect. Also, people are definitely not seeking out medical attention - possibly when it is required.
My guess would be that the uptick in deaths from other illnesses will be lagging by quite a bit - we'll probably see it in the data for the next few years at least, but it's unlikely to be discernible yet.
Reduction in road traffic deaths will be having an immediate impact, but in the other direction.
RT deaths are negligible - 1770 a year
Yeah, alright. There are probably some other causes (industrial accidents?) that are also depressed right now, but it probably doesn't affect the overall picture.
What might matter is a meaningful reduction in the c. 400 pw serious injuries we see from road accidents - but that's a long term effect.
As for astrology, I am not a subscriber, but it is perfectly possible that the movement of celestial bodies has a greater impact on the lives of humans than is measurable currently. .
If you're talking about meteorite or comet impacts, then you undoubtedly have a point. Similarly, sunrise; sunset; the tides; seasons; solar storms...
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
No, absolutely not true. The conversation is the people DISCUSSING A CONSPIRACY THEORY about that. They absolutely did not say that is what they were doing.
Their conversation has been edited for the consumption of Twitter to make it seem like they were doing it. If you had actually read the full exchange you would know that was not true.
Don't spread fake news.
I have read all 800 pages and they were not dealing with cases of AS with the speed they should have or using the expulsion from the Party of Anti Semites tool, if it could damage Corbyn, or the culprit was on the correct side of the party. The number one priority should have been to rid the party of proven Anti Semites the Party staff deliberately dragged heels.
Look at the number of expulsions under McNicholl compared to once he had gone.
You are trying to spin the report in a fake way Alistair
The OBR forecasts just published make good reading for Sunak.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
Well, its their call!
If additional unemployment peaks at 2m Sunak will have done a very good job!
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
No, absolutely not true. The conversation is the people DISCUSSING A CONSPIRACY THEORY about that. They absolutely did not say that is what they were doing.
Their conversation has been edited for the consumption of Twitter to make it seem like they were doing it. If you had actually read the full exchange you would know that was not true.
Don't spread fake news.
I have read all 800 pages and they were not dealing with cases of AS with the speed they should have or using the expulsion from the Party of Anti Semites tool, if it could damage Corbyn, or the culprit was on the correct side of the party. The number one priority should have been to rid the party of proven Anti Semites the Party staff deliberately dragged heels.
Look at the number of expulsions under McNicholl compared to once he had gone.
You are trying to spin the report in a fake way Alistair
Quote the actual Ken Livingston conversation then, the one that you says shows Tom Watson intervened to keep Ken around.
You won't because it doesn't say what you said it did.
Option 1 I think. Probably too early for lockdown to be leading to more deaths than usual. If anything I think other deaths might be down a bit.
The under-reporting/recording of Covid deaths appears to be a worldwide phenomenon. Given the problems testing everyone, coupled with a significant number of false negatives, that's not exactly surprising.
As for astrology, I am not a subscriber, but it is perfectly possible that the movement of celestial bodies has a greater impact on the lives of humans than is measurable currently. .
If you're talking about meteorite or comet impacts, then you undoubtedly have a point. Similarly, sunrise; sunset; the tides; seasons; solar storms...
Otherwise, not so much. (ie it's utter bollocks.)
There are probably also personality differences depending on birth months because of our school year start dates, not sure that is what mystic meg is relying on though.
The OBR forecasts just published make good reading for Sunak.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
Well, its their call!
If additional unemployment peaks at 2m Sunak will have done a very good job!
If furloughed counts as employed, surely that should be lower?
On Topic I think you completely miss the point. There are lots of example of excusing AS if it was from one part of the party and deliberate dragging of heels on AS as a deliberate ploy
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
These people are racist apologists.
I find that an appealing story - principled left-wing campaigner undermined by traitorous Blairites. I so want it to be true.
I can't reconcile it with all the other facts available, though. What of the interventions by Corbyn's office to stop expulsions of specific individuals, to give just one example?
Give me a single example of an intervention from Corbyns office to stop an expulsion . If the information came from HQ staffers its probably BS and the report gives you dozens of examples where McNicholls staff applied a light touch so that AS on the right werent punished at all
I say to you look at the number of expulsions under this lot and contrast with Formbys tenure.
If it didn't look like that, you really would be asking about the need for the lockdown...
Thankfully not since records began. It would be interesting to see a comparison with the numbers for 1918-1919.
Interesting, but not necessarily that helpful. 1918 was a much less connected world, and Spanish flu (as best as we can tell) was less infectious than Covid-19. Plus I'd guess that requirements for registering deaths promptly were less stringent?
All of which, coupled with difficulties in separating out deaths due to the War (direct and indirect) at the start of the epidemic means you'd probably see less of an obvious peak and more of a continuous pattern of deaths in excess of the baseline. Although that baseline would presumably have to be taken as pre-1914, for obvious reasons.
The V shaped economic recovery looks wildly optimistic for the UK to me particularly if the health problem isn't fully (elimination or a vaccine neither of which look likely this year) sorted within the year.
The OBR forecasts just published make good reading for Sunak.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
Well, its their call!
It's not like they've got many good choices, though. We're in the middle of a natural catastrophe. It's a surreal one, because for the majority it is, at the moment, a cozy, comfortable, catastrophe - unless you're in the front line of the NHS or you have the disease right now.
If it would be more economically catastrophic to release the lockdown early (as per the considered opinions of the vast majority of economists), then it's not a choice of this or service as usual. It's between this and potentially worse alternatives.
But with the blue skies outside, all home comforts on tap, it's difficult to comprehend the magnitude of what's happening.
If it didn't look like that, you really would be asking about the need for the lockdown...
Thankfully not since records began. It would be interesting to see a comparison with the numbers for 1918-1919.
Interesting, but not necessarily that helpful. 1918 was a much less connected world, and Spanish flu (as best as we can tell) was less infectious than Covid-19. Plus I'd guess that requirements for registering deaths promptly were less stringent?
All of which, coupled with difficulties in separating out deaths due to the War (direct and indirect) at the start of the epidemic means you'd probably see less of an obvious peak and more of a continuous pattern of deaths in excess of the baseline. Although that baseline would presumably have to be taken as pre-1914, for obvious reasons.
Spanish flu infected 500 million people
Coronavirus probably up to about 20 million by now, if we assumed figures are underreported by a factor of ten.
On Topic I think you completely miss the point. There are lots of example of excusing AS if it was from one part of the party and deliberate dragging of heels on AS as a deliberate ploy
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
These people are racist apologists.
The Corbynista gripes are fair if the report is accurate. As an outsider, floating voter who has been desperate for an opposition I could vote for, it just shows what a shambles Labour were. Most of us dont care who started it or why, what we need to see is no tolerance for racism and a competent, united party.
How would this have caused more PPE to be manufactured?
If, as looks highly likely, less PPE is available in Britain in a couple of weeks’ time than would have been the case if the government had not refused to join this scheme because of Europhobic dogma, it is almost certain that people will die as a result. The people responsible for that decision should be prosecuted.
You'd be the one squealing loudest of all when it was civil servants who get prosecuted...
Not at all. Anyone responsible for this decision needs to face the consequences of it.
Not noticing too many Leavers speaking up for the need to secure whatever PPE Britain can by whatever means it can. Here’s your opportunity.
But perhaps the visceral hatred of the EU extends to the point of refusing PPE from it even if it would save lives.
More a complete lack of belief that any product would actually have come the UK's way. The only evidence I have seen so far is of countries looking after their own. Where you see hatred, others might see cynicism, maybe realism - that the EU would say "They've left - fuck 'em. Give the kit to our people."
Ah, the deranged paranoia of the true Europhobe. When that’s all you’ve got left, the padded cell awaits you.
It is an entirely sensible strategy to use Uk based resources to kick start new sources of PPE, tests, ventilators etc.
a) Smaller logistics chains. b) Lower risk from transportation "issues" c) Higher level of oversight d) Patriotic boost to productivity. e) Complete control over supply once established.
A far better use of resources in the long battle ahead than getting a small slice of a one off delivery from China via the EU.
An alternative explanation is that Britain actually has a comparatively strong capacity to manufacture PPE and ventilators, and the 'EU procurement scheme' was a means of allowing smaller countries who lacked this capacity to share in its fruits. It would explain why the EU was so keen to allow Britain to join the scheme, despite their previous inflexible stances on cherry-picking aspects of EU membership, and why the government has provided so many contradictory reasons as to why it chose not to. If this proves to be true, no doubt Alistair will switch from blaming the government for letting British subjects die due to Europhobic dogma to blaming the government for letting EU subjects die due to Europhobic dogma.
AM believed that there were no strawberries in the supermarkets in the summer of 2018.
He has a long standing derangement on this subject.
I’m afraid a citation is needed for that claim.
(Spoiler: you won’t find it.)
Yet you know its true.
There was a reason I gave a daily Tesco strawberry score in 2018.
Go looking. You won’t find a citation for what you claimed.
It’s not my fault if you misread what I actually wrote.
I'm enjoying the seamless transition of the Brexit extremists from "fruit picking problems are fake news" to "hurrah that we have no strawberries".
I fear you have become the mirror image of the ideologues you condemn - whereas they might oppose any connections with the EU you oppose anything they do and so support joining any EU scheme.
Whereas to my mind the sensible strategy is one of help and co-operation where possible but detachment if necessary.
I would also somewhat doubt whether there are that many ideologues in government and whether they have much effect on the great inertial mass of statist bureaucracy in any case.
That's Emilie Oldknow level of quoting.
Thanks for the compliment
But my last point is something which I am concerned about - how much is bureaucratic inertia damaging action.
I suspect it has played a part re PPE, testing, border control and perhaps also for new ventilator suppliers.
The story related in the book Piece of Cake, about an RAF fighter squadron being denied spares at the start of the Battle of Britain, was based on true story.
They didn't have the paperwork to request spares, because the'd lost that in France. Along with the paperwork to get more paperwork.
Never in the field of human conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few... "He must be talking about our back-pay, then."
I was watching a documentary about the Spanish Armada the other day.
They mentioned that after the Armada the government didn't pay the navy's wages. When the sailors complained they were dying of starvation, Cecil (I think) said that "at least if they starve to death we won't have to pay them"... by the end of 1588 about half of them were dead of sickness or hunger.
I wonder why cumulative is now the best way to show this, when last week plotting weekly deaths was fine?
I would have thought the period prior to the first Covid death was irrelevant myself
The agenda he seems to be pushing is that these people would have all died anyway. Well, we've just run out of those people and they are still dying, and the statistics are a week out of date already.
I wonder why cumulative is now the best way to show this, when last week plotting weekly deaths was fine?
I would have thought the period prior to the first Covid death was irrelevant myself
The agenda he seems to be pushing is that these people would have all died anyway. Well, we've just run out of those people and they are still dying, and the statistics are a week out of date already.
The OBR forecasts just published make good reading for Sunak.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
Well, its their call!
If additional unemployment peaks at 2m Sunak will have done a very good job!
If furloughed counts as employed, surely that should be lower?
I dont think so. Furlough is very helpful but isnt going to stop lots of companies going bust and others downsizing. If you are in hospitality or travel for example the picture will remain bleak for 2020 and maybe 2021 not just a couple of months.
How would this have caused more PPE to be manufactured?
If, as looks highly likely, less PPE is available in Britain in a couple of weeks’ time than would have been the case if the government had not refused to join this scheme because of Europhobic dogma, it is almost certain that people will die as a result. The people responsible for that decision should be prosecuted.
You'd be the one squealing loudest of all when it was civil servants who get prosecuted...
Not at all. Anyone responsible for this decision needs to face the consequences of it.
Not noticing too many Leavers speaking up for the need to secure whatever PPE Britain can by whatever means it can. Here’s your opportunity.
But perhaps the visceral hatred of the EU extends to the point of refusing PPE from it even if it would save lives.
More a complete lack of belief that any product would actually have come the UK's way. The only evidence I have seen so far is of countries looking after their own. Where you see hatred, others might see cynicism, maybe realism - that the EU would say "They've left - fuck 'em. Give the kit to our people."
Ah, the deranged paranoia of the true Europhobe. When that’s all you’ve got left, the padded cell awaits you.
It is an entirely sensible strategy to use Uk based resources to kick start new sources of PPE, tests, ventilators etc.
a) Smaller logistics chains. b) Lower risk from transportation "issues" c) Higher level of oversight d) Patriotic boost to productivity. e) Complete control over supply once established.
A far better use of resources in the long battle ahead than getting a small slice of a one off delivery from China via the EU.
An alternative explanation is that Britain actually has a comparatively strong capacity to manufacture PPE and ventilators, and the 'EU procurement scheme' was a means of allowing smaller countries who lacked this capacity to share in its fruits. It would explain why the EU was so keen to allow Britain to join the scheme, despite their previous inflexible stances on cherry-picking aspects of EU membership, and why the government has provided so many contradictory reasons as to why it chose not to. If this proves to be true, no doubt Alistair will switch from blaming the government for letting British subjects die due to Europhobic dogma to blaming the government for letting EU subjects die due to Europhobic dogma.
AM believed that there were no strawberries in the supermarkets in the summer of 2018.
He has a long standing derangement on this subject.
I’m afraid a citation is needed for that claim.
(Spoiler: you won’t find it.)
Yet you know its true.
There was a reason I gave a daily Tesco strawberry score in 2018.
Go looking. You won’t find a citation for what you claimed.
It’s not my fault if you misread what I actually wrote.
I'm enjoying the seamless transition of the Brexit extremists from "fruit picking problems are fake news" to "hurrah that we have no strawberries".
I fear you have become the mirror image of the ideologues you condemn - whereas they might oppose any connections with the EU you oppose anything they do and so support joining any EU scheme.
Whereas to my mind the sensible strategy is one of help and co-operation where possible but detachment if necessary.
I would also somewhat doubt whether there are that many ideologues in government and whether they have much effect on the great inertial mass of statist bureaucracy in any case.
That's Emilie Oldknow level of quoting.
Thanks for the compliment
But my last point is something which I am concerned about - how much is bureaucratic inertia damaging action.
I suspect it has played a part re PPE, testing, border control and perhaps also for new ventilator suppliers.
The story related in the book Piece of Cake, about an RAF fighter squadron being denied spares at the start of the Battle of Britain, was based on true story.
They didn't have the paperwork to request spares, because the'd lost that in France. Along with the paperwork to get more paperwork.
Never in the field of human conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few... "He must be talking about our back-pay, then."
I was watching a documentary about the Spanish Armada the other day.
They mentioned that after the Armada the government didn't pay the navy's wages. When the sailors complained they were dying of starvation, Cecil (I think) said that "at least if they starve to death we won't have to pay them"... by the end of 1588 about half of them were dead of sickness or hunger.
I mentioned the Armada down thread.
A naval chap I met told me that there were documents in the Admiralty archives complaining about Admiral Nelson. Apparently the expenditure of ammunition by ships under his command was something shocking. Not to mention repair bills.
Usual nationalist divisive lies. How long before Brexiteers try to excuse our terrible death rate compared to Germany by some similarly mendacious story about Germans/EU/foreigners?
If it’s a lie it needs to be nailed promptly. If it’s not and it’s some attempt at national coordination it looks like a communications cock up.
I wonder why cumulative is now the best way to show this, when last week plotting weekly deaths was fine?
I would have thought the period prior to the first Covid death was irrelevant myself
The agenda he seems to be pushing is that these people would have all died anyway. Well, we've just run out of those people and they are still dying, and the statistics are a week out of date already.
It wouldn't say it's an agenda.
What would you call it? The argument has been (and you can see it in the tweet) is that these are a "pools of people" who would die when the next virus comes along.
Usual nationalist divisive lies. How long before Brexiteers try to excuse our terrible death rate compared to Germany by some similarly mendacious story about Germans/EU/foreigners?
If it’s a lie it needs to be nailed promptly. If it’s not and it’s some attempt at national coordination it looks like a communications cock up.
Jason Leitch is probably a unionist southern jessie.
Comments
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1249991803207647232?s=20
The response to Covid-19 demands political judgement which goes way beyond the remit of epidemiologists.
Norman Lewis"
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/14/experts-know-your-limits/
I have rejoined in order to support Starmer candidates in NEC elections. Sir Keir needs to do what Kinnock did with Militant, publicly boot out Milne, Formby and co to make it crystal clear to voters that the party is no longer controlled by the Corbynites.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/us/politics/trump-daily-coronavirus-briefing.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
This is what I find so depressing. No-one seems interested in explaining why Labour did so well in 2017 and so badly in 2019 under the same leader, except in terms of their own preferences and prejudices. The leisurely leadership election produced more of the same and so has this new leaked report. It was all the fault of the other lot; my side was perfect.
However it compares, your first seven words are still relevant!
Also, Corbyn in 2017 wasn't Corbyn in 2019. The public were far more forgiving on him.
https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1250009561462976512?s=21
EDIT: In 2017 the professional Southside team worked to firstly defend Labour seats against the Tory threat where internal polls showed them taking seats like West Bromwich East. Then the agenda swung in a once-in-a-generation event as the Tories imploded their own campaign. We know that people were willing to vote Labour to stop Brexit. In 2019 the professionals had gone and instead Labour targeted all kinds of silly seats and chose to send activists into seats like Cities and Finchely to wreck the traitors.
In the end, to unite the Tory party either the hardcore leavers or the hardcore remainers had to go to finally end the civil war on Europe (it ended up with the hardcore remainers leaving).
In the same way to unite Labour, either the hardcore Corbynites or the hardcore Blairites have to go. It initially looked like the Blairites would leave with the foundation of the TIGs. Now it looks like the Corbynites have to go.
That doesn't mean a purge and it doesn't mean everyone on the left has to leave but those who can't be reconciled to the direction of travel, will have to go (hopefully of their own volition). Bearing in mind a lot of them were previously in the Greens or Socialist Workers and tend to live in ultra-safe Labour seats, it wouldn't be a great loss.
'Even as it stands, the Home Guard could only exist in a country where men feel themselves free. The totalitarian states can do great things, but there is one thing they cannot do: they cannot give the factory-worker a rifle and tell him to take it home and keep it in his bedroom. That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage, is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.'
Context etc.
A good chunk of the excess deaths must be COVID. The others are probably from the knock on impact.
Plot a similar graph for Taiwan, say, and it won't look like ours.
In 2019, below-the-radar social media campaigning by (or rather on behalf of) the Conservatives is also underestimated and unexplored, along with my own theory of Corbyn's glasses.
Reduction in road traffic deaths will be having an immediate impact, but in the other direction.
I think I'll stick with the simpler self description.
All of which, coupled with difficulties in separating out deaths due to the War (direct and indirect) at the start of the epidemic means you'd probably see less of an obvious peak and more of a continuous pattern of deaths in excess of the baseline. Although that baseline would presumably have to be taken as pre-1914, for obvious reasons.
Labour staff were dragging their feet and deliberately not dealing with AS to make Corbyn get the blame.
KL for example a very clear whatsapp exchange shows Corbyn wanted him expelled Watson got NEC to extend his suspension instead so Corbyn got the blame
Read the while thing it is clear fighting AS was not a priority unfortunately.
These people are racist apologists.
Their conversation has been edited for the consumption of Twitter to make it seem like they were doing it. If you had actually read the full exchange you would know that was not true.
Don't spread fake news.
Strange that
Unfortunately 1984 and 'Farm' have already gone up in flames here. Not too late for 'Pier' and 'Aspidistra' though.
Better late than never
FWIW I understand that the woman I referred to said she used personality types and hobbies.
35% shrinkage in GDP in 2Q
2m extra unemployed.
and just the GBP218bn in extra debt this year.
That GBP218bn will hang like an albatross around this government neck. It will ensure they can do nothing for the rest of this parliament but try to steal money from conservative voters when they are not looking.
Well, its their call!
I can't reconcile it with all the other facts available, though. What of the interventions by Corbyn's office to stop expulsions of specific individuals, to give just one example?
Telegraph.
OBR: Britain faces biggest budget deficit since WW2
The Office for Budget Responsibility has warned that borrowing could surge to £273bn this year, equivalent to 14pc of GDP – far outstripping the peak deficit of 10pc in the financial crisis.
Well, if only everyone was normal people.
What might matter is a meaningful reduction in the c. 400 pw serious injuries we see from road accidents - but that's a long term effect.
Similarly, sunrise; sunset; the tides; seasons; solar storms...
Otherwise, not so much. (ie it's utter bollocks.)
Look at the number of expulsions under McNicholl compared to once he had gone.
You are trying to spin the report in a fake way Alistair
You won't because it doesn't say what you said it did.
I say to you look at the number of expulsions under this lot and contrast with Formbys tenure.
We're in the middle of a natural catastrophe. It's a surreal one, because for the majority it is, at the moment, a cozy, comfortable, catastrophe - unless you're in the front line of the NHS or you have the disease right now.
If it would be more economically catastrophic to release the lockdown early (as per the considered opinions of the vast majority of economists), then it's not a choice of this or service as usual. It's between this and potentially worse alternatives.
But with the blue skies outside, all home comforts on tap, it's difficult to comprehend the magnitude of what's happening.
Imagine we had not locked down, and extend that week and a half uptick a couple of months forward...
They mentioned that after the Armada the government didn't pay the navy's wages. When the sailors complained they were dying of starvation, Cecil (I think) said that "at least if they starve to death we won't have to pay them"... by the end of 1588 about half of them were dead of sickness or hunger.
https://twitter.com/DanBebber/status/1249990619365281793
A naval chap I met told me that there were documents in the Admiralty archives complaining about Admiral Nelson. Apparently the expenditure of ammunition by ships under his command was something shocking. Not to mention repair bills.
Am I doing this right?
https://twitter.com/DanBebber/status/1250002748155846656?s=19