That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.
Seems plausible to me given there was nothing structural that caused this and the support given unlike in the States.
I'd like to see if someone could respond to my numbers I posted earlier that suggested the costs to the Exchequer could be a fraction of what we've been assuming - net.
Not the faintest chance I will use this App and I know others who feel the same.
I'd consider the Apple / Google one if it's proven it doesn't store data.
I've seen a lot of that view on facebook. Makes me very sad.
We need this app. We need it to work. We need as many people to use it as possible, despite their distrust and disgust of the Tories.
Otherwise people die.
The data is only stored on your own device until the point at which you choose to contact the NHS using it.
No, that's how the Apple/Google solution works. The NHS one works with a big database of names and locations behind it.
No, the data of who you have contacted is only stored on the device until you report positive. At that point it is shared and those people are pinged.
Records of contacts will be stored on phones. If a user comes down with coronavirus symptoms they report this in the app. That data is then shared with a health service database and their anonymous ID matched with other phones they have come into contact with.
Yep and I won't touch it with a bargepole.
That's your choice as it clearly is for many others if PB is typical but please don't moan when we end up in lockdown again in a couple of months time. There is no easy way out of this so if people aren't willing to try to take steps to curtail it we know what the alternative is.
We were shopping yesterday in a supermarket and there was a guy of about 40 shopping with 2 kids, 1 on a scooter and the kids were running round bumping into people and he wasn't taking a blind bit of notice of social distancing. As we left he was outside on the pavement talking to another couple about a foot apart complaining loudly about the pubs not being open completely missing the point that it is due to people like him that they won't be reopening any time soon.
That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"
My vague recollection is that it was something to do with the flight time of a missile from Iraq to our sovereign bases on Cyprus. It really is astonishing that Alastair Campbell did not go to jail for the dodgy dossier. Even more astonishing than the idea that anyone should listen to a word he has said since.
The point was that the government pushed "45 minutes". Digging into the technicalities of that would have revealed it to be bullshit.
The missile flight time to Cyprus was a justification after the fact, IIRC
I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.
I think this is just a feature of the way the testing labs are set up. I always was shocked at how long it took to get a simple blood test result processed - sample sent to lab, lab tests a few days later, sends results back to GP, GP forwards to specialist (by fax, naturally, and occasionally after demanding payment). Took over a week in some case - I think it's a bit better now.
In other countries, they'll just take the sample and process it while you wait - on one occasion whilst abroad I think I just phoned the doctor's secretary and read the numbers out to her. I never understood why it wasn't possible for clinics to do this here.
When he announces nothing of the sort I wonder what their front pages will be on Monday?
I see no reason why he can't open a wider variety of retail shops, with appropriate social distancing measures. Likewise hair salons with masks and sanitisers. That would be a huge, huge thing for many. Even being able to get a haircut by a pro at home would be huge for many.
I bet most of those highlighting the BoE report are "accidentally" omitting the projections of the rebound afterwards? Because that either: 1 - Doesn't fit with causing drama and shock 2 - Doesn't march with the message they want to project.
Of course, a growth of 15% from a drop of 14% doesn't quite get you back to where you started - but it does only leave you 1% down.
A narrative of "The BoE has projected a huge fall this year matched with an equally huge rebound next year" wouldn't cause much drama, would it?
Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.
No chance they will say it was a mistake.
What they could say is that we flattened the curve and can ease off now. But I wouldn't expect even that much personally.
That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.
If the virus goes away through vaccine, herd immunity, mutation out or sufficient suppression then the economy comes roaring back.
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.
Rather than the arbitrary 100k a day target, Hancock would have been far better promising lesser numbers, but with time targets e.g. all NHS staff & hospital admissions within 24hrs, plebs 48hrs. With this disease speed of diagnosis is key, especially if you are in a position to spread it to a lot of people or needes on the frontline.
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
I think citizens of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Hamburg in 1945 would strongly disagree with your claim about WW2 there. And I'm sure there are at least a hundred good other examples.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"
My vague recollection is that it was something to do with the flight time of a missile from Iraq to our sovereign bases on Cyprus. It really is astonishing that Alastair Campbell did not go to jail for the dodgy dossier. Even more astonishing than the idea that anyone should listen to a word he has said since.
I thought it was the time taken to prepare to fire said missile at Cyprus?
When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
I think citizens of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Hamburg in 1945 would strongly disagree with your claim about WW2 there. And I'm sure there are at least a hundred good other examples.
My comment was about Britain in relation to the current situation.
Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.
Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.
Call me cynical, but if they discovered that lockdown had been a mistake, I highly doubt the findings would be revealed.
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
Learn PyTorch ;-)
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.
The Ferguson news was much bigger than the fake news of nonsense comparisons the scientists say to take precautions with.
The "threshold" effect was the following day when UK numbers passed 30k.
Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.
I would be surprised if they haven't got something, and my thinking is along these lines.
Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.
How's Mrs M doing these days, Malc? Progressing, I hope.
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously. Thanks for asking.
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterday
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
Learn PyTorch ;-)
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.
In all seriousness, it sounds in a way like lockdown has actually been a good thing for you, to be able to step away, recharge and try some new things.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"
Quite. The Iraq War offers a good example of how neither the press nor the Opposition should disarm for the sake of national unity.
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterday
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.
30 May for the diary. My memory of 1997 was finally knowing what multiple orgasm felt like.
I know this might be an unfashionable view, but I think you might be in for another one at the next election. Starmer has 4 years to show his professionalism and Johnson has 4 years to show his rank amateurism, which the public will become increasingly tired of. I don't particularly want a Labour government, but the Tory party needs a very large dose of disinfectant, as does the Republican Party in the US.
Starmer is no Blair, when Blair took over in 1994 he had a double digit lead, Starmer is over 10 points behind. Even John Smith was ahead when he took over in 1992.
At best he will scrape in with the LDs, he will not get a majority for Labour
Scotland is a big problem for Labour. However, four years of Starmer appearing as Rumpole of the Bailey and Boris appearing like Bertie Wooster could change that.
Scotland voting SNP but also being in the UK has it all ways, so it will take an earthquake to undo. Besides, lots of people who would vote for Starmer won't vote for the party as long as it is full of dim extremists.
Big issues on that will come to a head soon, next election at latest is SNP's last chance, if they do not make it about independence and tell Boris where to stuff his NO then there will be carnage.
Scotland's in a curious place. SNP seem to be completely dominant, like ANC in S Africa. Nicola miles ahead personally.
And yet, Indy, their core policy, is becoming ever less plausible as time goes on and Brexit becomes entrenched. Covid-19 is a further hammer blow.
I think the view of many Scots is pragmatic. Happy to vote SNP as they seem competent and can extract best deal from Westminster. But sniffy about independence because of devastating economic cost.
Competent or just not as incompetent as the other parties who by any measure seem completely incompetent?
Very competent ( far from perfect ), miles ahead of other parties.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.
Well, it's not. In my experience, anyone who interprets Italian data without a large mound of salt deserves everything that's coming to them. The figure they are reporting is simply wrong.
Ours is also wrong, but less wrong. And to return to the original point, the papers getting things right for the wrong reason doesn't mean we don't have a properly functioning free press. But thank you for clarifying.
When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
Sorry, I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis. From what I understood from speaking to people who lived through the war, it was mainly rationing and bombing that had to be endured on the Home Front, and even the latter depended where you lived.
As for the 1960s, I think you might have missed a generation in between.
Darling on R4. A reminder of a time when Labour had proper front rank politicians.
No politician did more to lose Labour its Scottish seats.
Why? Gordon Brown's Labour easily won most seats in Scotland in 2010 and Darling led the winning No campaign in 2014.
It was only under Ed Miliband Labour lost its Scottish MPs
Up to your usual Scottish lack of knowledge. Miliband had nothing to do with other than being the dupe to follow tweedledee and tweedledum. Their supporting the Tories against the interests of Scotland was what did for them. They have no chance of any return until they realise that they are supposed to be a Scottish party and support independence, plus change almost every donkey they currently have as MSP's.
If people want independence they will vote SNP or a new Nat party, if Scottish Labour backed independence it would just lose its Unionist vote
Starmer trying to square the circle with talk of "federalism", whatever that means.
He's not cut through yet but it will be interesting to see if he has any impact on SLABs fortunes. Miliband and Corbyn were almost purpose-built to repel Scottish voters, but a serious politician like Sir Keir may appeal to that grain of old-style moral purpose that you find with some strains of progressive opinion, if Indy ever goes off the boil. However, wouldn't hang my hat on it, certainly so long as SLAB are lumbered with Richard Leonard.
We had some interesting - and informative - chats on federalism here in 2013-4 in the runup to indyref 1. IIRC we generally agreed that short of bringing back the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy or some similar way of breaking up England, or giving the Scots (etc) an effective veto on what the English wanted, it was impossible to federalise the UK in any meaningful way. I've lost track of the number of SLAB pols and their UK equivalents who talk about Federalism as the solution but I've not seen one clear statement of how you would get those changes through. I'd say it is even less likely after Brexit.
There is only one way to go , independence. Make 2011 just an independence vote, no ifs or buts.
Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.
Bit like a war bond?
Yes, and by the time 25 years comes around the economy is big enough to support rolling the debt into standard issue gilts.
How's Mrs M doing these days, Malc? Progressing, I hope.
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously. Thanks for asking.
All the best to both of you. You have both had a tough time
I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.
I think this is just a feature of the way the testing labs are set up. I always was shocked at how long it took to get a simple blood test result processed - sample sent to lab, lab tests a few days later, sends results back to GP, GP forwards to specialist (by fax, naturally, and occasionally after demanding payment). Took over a week in some case - I think it's a bit better now.
In other countries, they'll just take the sample and process it while you wait - on one occasion whilst abroad I think I just phoned the doctor's secretary and read the numbers out to her. I never understood why it wasn't possible for clinics to do this here.
It's improving. Last time I had to have a blood test, the practice nurse took the bloods and I went back a week later and reception printed off the results. It was only precautionary and not particularly urgent so I'm not sure what turnround time they could have managed if necessary.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Advice and rules are quite distinct. I am advised not to smoke tobacco, I am arrested if I am caught buying heroin.
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterday
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
Learn PyTorch ;-)
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.
In all seriousness, it sounds in a way like lockdown has actually been a good thing for you, to be able to step away, recharge and try some new things.
Yes, it's been quite relaxing, it's also been nice to reconnect with my partner properly for the first time in a long time. We've both got such busy lives with work and social commitments, both of us are now on furlough so we're spending much more time together and it's been great.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.
The government’s communications strategy - and the confusion between advice and rules - and with what individual Ministers have said off the cuff has been really poor. That really needs to change - especially when lockdown starts being eased.
How's Mrs M doing these days, Malc? Progressing, I hope.
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously. Thanks for asking.
All the best to both of you. You have both had a tough time
Thanks G , have to say been a lot easier for me though.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
Given the virus has caused at least 30,000 deaths with these extreme measures, it's very likely the death toll would have been far worse without it.
When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
Sorry, I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis. From what I understood from speaking to people who lived through the war, it was mainly rationing and bombing that had to be endured on the Home Front, and even the latter depended where you lived.
As for the 1960s, I think you might have missed a generation in between.
I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis.
I'll put you down as "conformist" then. The best ones don't even notice it.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I am also surprised people just accept that the lockdown as the panacea to prevent Covid 19 spread, especially as our R figure was likely below 1 when we went into lockdown (based on the hospital admission peak on the 2nd April 2020). Maybe this much talked about enquiry will find that the lockdown only had a marginal impact on Covid-19 and that the other negative impacts of it were greater than its positives.
As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
Very early days. Labour won't have to try very hard for people to eventually cotton on to the fact that we have a lazy buffoon as PM and the alternative is no longer an even worse option.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I am also surprised people just accept that the lockdown as the panacea to prevent Covid 19 spread, especially as our R figure was likely below 1 when we went into lockdown (based on the hospital admission peak on the 2nd April 2020). Maybe this much talked about enquiry will find that the lockdown only had a marginal impact on Covid-19 and that the other negative impacts of it were greater than its positives.
I really don't believe that graph as you can make it say whatever you want by picking different lag times. The government's advice was R was around 2 when the lockdown started.
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterday
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
Try and understand the difference between a rise in revenues and a rise in hiring. Or the difference between revenues and profits. An understanding of how Ocado actually operates - mainly using robots and minimising human involvement - would help too. Not to mention its statement that it is unable to fulfill many of the orders it receives. @RochdalePioneers has also explained how online ordering is not profitable for many supermarkets. Most shops and supermarkets will be retrenching not expanding.
My children are starting to lose hope.
But, hey, we’ll have cakes delivered by Ocado to eat......
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.
The government’s communications strategy - and the confusion between advice and rules - and with what individual Ministers have said off the cuff has been really poor. That really needs to change - especially when lockdown starts being eased.
It is "back of a fag packet" government from a "back of a fag packet" PM
As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
I think that there has been too much emphasis on we did what seemed right on the evidence we had at the time and not enough on well, if we knew what we know now... On that I agree.
Nonsense, it's a novel virus, to not go as precautionary as possible was always wildly irresponsible.
So you think we should have closed the economy down for SARS? Or H1N1 or bird flu? Novel virus is not the criteria, nor is there any absolutes.
International flights from any region with cases when SARS 1 was going round ? Yes.
We live in a globalised world. The damage that would cause would outweigh the benefits by an order of magnitude.
Plus what do we do with the potentially millions of Britons abroad?
If the incidence of the virus is similar in the place from where the flight started, it makes no difference to the UK. Mixing two pots (albeit unequal in size) of the same temperature water makes no difference to the temperature of the combined pot.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.
Pointing out the hypocrisy of those involved in leading our response is not sexist trivia. It wasn't with NZ's health minister, it wasn't with Scotland's CSO and it isn't with Ferguson. Pointing out hypocrisy is part of what a free press should be doing and airbrushing that out to hyperventilate over fake comparisons isn't progress.
I think that there has been too much emphasis on we did what seemed right on the evidence we had at the time and not enough on well, if we knew what we know now... On that I agree.
Nonsense, it's a novel virus, to not go as precautionary as possible was always wildly irresponsible.
So you think we should have closed the economy down for SARS? Or H1N1 or bird flu? Novel virus is not the criteria, nor is there any absolutes.
International flights from any region with cases when SARS 1 was going round ? Yes.
We live in a globalised world. The damage that would cause would outweigh the benefits by an order of magnitude.
Plus what do we do with the potentially millions of Britons abroad?
If the incidence of the virus is similar in the place from where the flight started, it makes no difference to the UK. Mixing two pots (albeit unequal in size) of the same temperature water makes no difference to the temperature of the combined pot.
No transmission during a long distance flight occurs ?
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etc
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
I've been on here complaining about lockdown and struggling with mental health. I think my epiphany has been that its the suspension of what I've spent 18 years doing that has caused the problems, not the lockdown as such. Its not WFH that has driven me mad, just work from a desk.
Fundamentally there is no magic wand that Johnson and PB chanters can wave. Many of us will be WFH at least in part from now on, and that means significant changes to our society from the makeup of our towns and cities to what kind of businesses prosper to our work life balance.
The really funny bit? On one hand digital connectivity is now *the* requirement we all need. To work, to shop, to socialise. On the other hand physical social connectivity which had been struggling in the era of everyone having a screen to distract them and now has stopped completely is what most of us crave. We have the opportunity to both significantly improve our digital connectivity to give us better work life balance AND use that balance to actually cherish the time we spend together and stop staring at screens...
Very early days. Labour won't have to try very hard for people to eventually cotton on to the fact that we have a lazy buffoon as PM and the alternative is no longer an even worse option.
Maybe they will decide they are all the same and may as well vote for the one that doesn't bore them rigid.
At this rate 2017 was a high point for Labour and they are actually finished.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I couldn't agree more with this post.
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.
Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etc
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
Not true. Some of the government’s severest critics on here have praised its financial response.
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
Are you in town? How about birds and birdsong; cloud types; tree types; counting paving stones; 8hr plank; learning the harppenny whistlelead guitarpiano recorder online; War & Peace; A la recherche du temps perdu; Catcher in the Rye; the entire Alex Rider back catalogue; the entire Asterix back catalogue; etc
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
Indeed but unless you can start running some significant surpluses (as happened in the mid to late 90s under Clarke and then Brown) all you can do is service the debt interest which means the money for some things has to be taken and used to service the debt interest repayment and of course if you have to borrow you are running to stand still.
Yes Governments have to borrow in times of emergencies but income tax was introduced in 1799 to cover the cost of defeating Bonaparte. The argument for me is the response going forward can't just be to keep borrowing but to accept the finances need to be improved and to seek additional tax revenue (and it's the income side of the sheet that is suffering with reduced tax receipts currently).
If you have to borrow AND you aren't getting in any income both the deficit and the debt will be increasing.
Shocking. It's almost as if people who have worked in tech and developed apps said exactly this would happen. Can we bill Matt Hancock for the additional billions it will cost to extend the lockdown?
Literally everything that has gone through the DoH has been a disaster. Testing was a disaster, PPE procurement was a disaster, this app is an unfolding disaster. Boris needs to man up and sack Hancock.
Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etc
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
It is called holding those to account that should have greater resources than us to make decisions of great import. We know that all of you that bought the "get Brexit Done" bullshit will no doubt supinely wag your tails and take what ever crappy dog food "Boris" serves up to you. The rest of us are questioning why we have a cabinet so full of lightweights and more importantly why we have the highest death rate in Europe. The latter is very very important.
Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etc
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
Not true. Some of the government’s severest critics on here have praised its financial response.
True. People do seem to like free money followed by recessions
That three parties that have had next to no coverage in the media in the last few months have increased their combined share by 6 pp just goes to show how some people behave away from an election.
As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
One man's emergency is another's BAU. Yes CV-19 is by all objective assessment an emergency. But so could be argued homelessness, child poverty, Len McCluskey's retirement fund, etc.
It's the old would you sleep with me for a million dollars or a dollar. Once you have accepted the principle, you are a whore whatever the amount.
Shocking. It's almost as if people who have worked in tech and developed apps said exactly this would happen. Can we bill Matt Hancock for the additional billions it will cost to extend the lockdown?
Literally everything that has gone through the DoH has been a disaster. Testing was a disaster, PPE procurement was a disaster, this app is an unfolding disaster. Boris needs to man up and sack Hancock.
Now is not the time for Boris to sack his human shield Health Secretary. Not before the official inquiry.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I couldn't agree more with this post.
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.
If loads of people have got the rona can the elderly really self-isolate? I mean, apparently the British can't even keep it out of care homes. Is there an example anywhere in world of elderly people self-isolating successfully?
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.
Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etc
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
It is called holding those to account that should have greater resources than us to make decisions of great import. We know that all of you that bought the "get Brexit Done" bullshit will no doubt supinely wag your tails and take what ever crappy dog food "Boris" serves up to you. The rest of us are questioning why we have a cabinet so full of lightweights and more importantly why we have the highest death rate in Europe. The latter is very very important.
Fair point Mr FoREMAIN, maybe I place too much emphasis on Brexit
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.
Sure, if you like, That sounds less like a front page headline thing, and more like an op-ed style piece, though.
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterday
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
Try and understand the difference between a rise in revenues and a rise in hiring. Or the difference between revenues and profits. An understanding of how Ocado actually operates - mainly using robots and minimising human involvement - would help too. Not to mention its statement that it is unable to fulfill many of the orders it receives. @RochdalePioneers has also explained how online ordering is not profitable for many supermarkets. Most shops and supermarkets will be retrenching not expanding.
My children are starting to lose hope.
But, hey, we’ll have cakes delivered by Ocado to eat......
So sorry for you and your family Cyclefree.
It is the most testing and trying of days for so many
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.
Lifting the lockdown early is a massive gamble for Boris. It risks compounding his original mistake (in eyes of the public) and making the case for a replacement (he is still messing up, we need someone else)
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.
Thank you both.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
We will see.
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
Tough times. Those outside the public sector and large safe companies are very exposed.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
Problem being all those who thought he was good will never vote for him anyway?
Good if you are struggling to sleep I would agree.
Missing Comrade Corby eh? Far better to have a loser who is a real lefty eh? Starmer will put Labour back in a position of credibility that Corbyn whose pea brained intellect never stood a chance. Plenty of people will vote for Starmer, even if some believe (wrongly in my view) that he is dull. Either way I would rather have a dull professional in charge of an organisation than a gameshow host clown or a terrorist sympathising thickhead. Starmer will need to bide his time, but probably not for long. Labour will also need to show it has rooted out the extremists anti-Semites and weirdos that Corbyn attracted to them, and that it is a credible alternative government.
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.
Eastern Europe has a very low death rate
Yes, and Germany and Austria of course. Maybe there is some genetic or cultural factor here, overlaying the differences in government and healthcare-system response.
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
I couldn't agree more with this post.
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.
If loads of people have got the rona can the elderly really self-isolate? I mean, apparently the British can't even keep it out of care homes. Is there an example anywhere in world of elderly people self-isolating successfully?
Twenty or so years ago when I was concerned with such matters it wasn't infrequent that, late on a Friday afternoon, those of us involved with Care of the Elderly wards would be instructed to find Care Home beds for however many elderly patients 'because A&E was filling up'.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.
Well, it's not. In my experience, anyone who interprets Italian data without a large mound of salt deserves everything that's coming to them. The figure they are reporting is simply wrong.
Ours is also wrong, but less wrong. And to return to the original point, the papers getting things right for the wrong reason doesn't mean we don't have a properly functioning free press. But thank you for clarifying.
The press just disappoint me at times. And this was one of them.
Comments
I'd like to see if someone could respond to my numbers I posted earlier that suggested the costs to the Exchequer could be a fraction of what we've been assuming - net.
We were shopping yesterday in a supermarket and there was a guy of about 40 shopping with 2 kids, 1 on a scooter and the kids were running round bumping into people and he wasn't taking a blind bit of notice of social distancing. As we left he was outside on the pavement talking to another couple about a foot apart complaining loudly about the pubs not being open completely missing the point that it is due to people like him that they won't be reopening any time soon.
The missile flight time to Cyprus was a justification after the fact, IIRC
In other countries, they'll just take the sample and process it while you wait - on one occasion whilst abroad I think I just phoned the doctor's secretary and read the numbers out to her. I never understood why it wasn't possible for clinics to do this here.
Not a fan of doing financial things online unless necessary... hope it all works ok.
Because that either:
1 - Doesn't fit with causing drama and shock
2 - Doesn't march with the message they want to project.
Of course, a growth of 15% from a drop of 14% doesn't quite get you back to where you started - but it does only leave you 1% down.
A narrative of "The BoE has projected a huge fall this year matched with an equally huge rebound next year" wouldn't cause much drama, would it?
What they could say is that we flattened the curve and can ease off now. But I wouldn't expect even that much personally.
If it hangs around like a bad smell, less so.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.
The "threshold" effect was the following day when UK numbers passed 30k.
Thanks for asking.
Ours is also wrong, but less wrong. And to return to the original point, the papers getting things right for the wrong reason doesn't mean we don't have a properly functioning free press. But thank you for clarifying.
As for the 1960s, I think you might have missed a generation in between.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
I'll put you down as "conformist" then. The best ones don't even notice it.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
Anxiety below the level of pre lockdown
89 000 participants.
My children are starting to lose hope.
But, hey, we’ll have cakes delivered by Ocado to eat......
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
A curious theory.
Most people right now are trying hard to follow the advice.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
Fundamentally there is no magic wand that Johnson and PB chanters can wave. Many of us will be WFH at least in part from now on, and that means significant changes to our society from the makeup of our towns and cities to what kind of businesses prosper to our work life balance.
The really funny bit? On one hand digital connectivity is now *the* requirement we all need. To work, to shop, to socialise. On the other hand physical social connectivity which had been struggling in the era of everyone having a screen to distract them and now has stopped completely is what most of us crave. We have the opportunity to both significantly improve our digital connectivity to give us better work life balance AND use that balance to actually cherish the time we spend together and stop staring at screens...
At this rate 2017 was a high point for Labour and they are actually finished.
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.
harppenny whistlelead guitarpianorecorder online; War & Peace; A la recherche du temps perdu; Catcher in the Rye; the entire Alex Rider back catalogue; the entire Asterix back catalogue; etcone form of exercise a day, for example a run, walk, or cycle -- alone or with members of your household
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others
Yes Governments have to borrow in times of emergencies but income tax was introduced in 1799 to cover the cost of defeating Bonaparte. The argument for me is the response going forward can't just be to keep borrowing but to accept the finances need to be improved and to seek additional tax revenue (and it's the income side of the sheet that is suffering with reduced tax receipts currently).
If you have to borrow AND you aren't getting in any income both the deficit and the debt will be increasing.
Shocking. It's almost as if people who have worked in tech and developed apps said exactly this would happen. Can we bill Matt Hancock for the additional billions it will cost to extend the lockdown?
Literally everything that has gone through the DoH has been a disaster. Testing was a disaster, PPE procurement was a disaster, this app is an unfolding disaster. Boris needs to man up and sack Hancock.
The rest of us are questioning why we have a cabinet so full of lightweights and more importantly why we have the highest death rate in Europe. The latter is very very important.
It's the old would you sleep with me for a million dollars or a dollar. Once you have accepted the principle, you are a whore whatever the amount.
Good if you are struggling to sleep I would agree.
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1258316121264001025
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.
It is the most testing and trying of days for so many
It risks compounding his original mistake (in eyes of the public) and making the case for a replacement (he is still messing up, we need someone else)
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1258334682439090176?s=21