Interestingly since lockdown the Council haven't cut the grass at all in the area in front of where I live, its been completely overgrown and full of dandelions etc that my children have loved picking when they get out.
Don't know if its a coincidence after the 'go back to work' message yesterday or not but there is someone from the Council outside now cutting the grass.
I'm wondering about GP surgeries. Ours effectively closed down weeks ago and it's hard to get seen physically -
"Have you got a cough?" "No". "A fever?" "No". "OK, so what's the problem then?" "Gone deaf and my eyeballs are bleeding." "But no cough or fever?"
Manchester City's parent company has agreed a deal for Belgian second-tier outfit Lommel SK. They are the ninth club to join the City Football Group (CFG), which has stakes in teams playing in the United States, Japan, Australia and China, among others.
Intuitively it seems obvious that masks must do some good. A major part of the problem is that lots of medical experts are so in terror of the anecdote police that they travel from the position that RCTs are in many cases the gold standard of evidence to the position that anything which is not an RCT is not evidence at all. It is very difficult to do an RCT of masks. Then again, nobody has done an RCT of the value of parachutes, but there is pretty good intuitive and anecdotal evidence that they are quite a lot better than placebo for those who have to jump out of aeroplanes.
Theonly intuitive argument I can see is overconfidence inspired by mask wearing. As against that, I don't believe compulsory seatbelt wearing has had any such effect, and there is a reasonably compelling counterargument that visible wearing of masks by others will serve to remind the absent minded to socially distance.
Geoff Barton from the Association of School and College Leaders says his organisation is "a bit disappointed" by the guidance that the youngest children are set to be the first to go back to school. He says the younger children are the ones who will find the distancing rules harder to understand - and that they will be harder for teachers to control.
-----
Dickhead....young kids are at zero risk, AND the science appears to show they don't transmit it to adults. You know perhaps Witty and Vallance have looked at the scientific literature on this and not gone well send the rug rats back first for no reason in particular.
I bet if they had said send back older kids first, they would have replied, but they are higher risk to teachers and each other.
Just the other day a 6 week old baby died, are you completely stupid. They may be low risk but are certainly not zero risk.
Reports of a 'Kawasaki-like disease' affecting kids are also still burning away in the background.
I love the desperation of the long lock down supporters anxious to prove they haven;t been sold one of the biggest pups in history.
Bit like today's ONS report on 'workforce deaths' of COVID. There have been more than two thousand! out of a workforce of....er......30 plus million. And out of a total number of deaths at the time of I think, 25,000?
Indeed, is the ONS sample even large enough to be drawing these conclusions?
I love the desperation of the 'liberate our economy at any cost' supporters ever ready to leap on any post that might prove inconvenient to their ardent hopes. Can you no just wander around with a wooden replica .50 cal mg and take selfies like your brethren?
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
Things were done properly. A company who were capable of delivering what was necessary was chosen and said company has delivered.
Max, just because you say that does not mean it was done right in any way. At best it looks dodgy. How lucky that a firm with prominent Tory MP as consultant just happen to be only company invited to have a £133M contract.
Starmer seeming to have an issue with devolution wanting things done as "one United Kingdom".
We're not one United Kingdom, we've got 4 nations of which 3 make their own decisions. Why should Boris dictate to Sturgeon etc or vice-versa. Does Starmer not understand the concept of devolution?
Starmer seeming to have an issue with devolution wanting things done as "one United Kingdom".
We're not one United Kingdom, we've got 4 nations of which 3 make their own decisions. Why should Boris dictate to Sturgeon etc or vice-versa. Does Starmer not understand the concept of devolution?
Again, Germany's 16 different regions have different rules....They are the model we should be following, or at least that's what I hear on twitter.
PB Tories attack Starmer, no surprises there then. Non-Tories like him. No surprise there then.
I have nothing against him but the problem is that there are different flavours of forensic. He sounds as if he is trying to persuade a High Court judge; he should sound as if he were trying to persuade a jury.
OK Quincel, I am going to continue my discussion with you from last night on the back of what is a very well written piece I agree Trump won by the skin of his teeth on the votes last time but there are a number of arguments against the logic.
First, take a look at those charts. There was a lot more volatility in Clinton vs Trump but what is clear is that Biden's lead over Trump has slumped. What is noticeable is that Trump's ratings have barely budged since the start of the timeline but Biden's has come down over 3%. His latest leads are down to 3-4%.
Second, there is the enthusiasm factor. In fact, there was a piece on here several weeks ago talking about the enthusiasm gap Biden has to Trump. Trump's voters are enthused either by him or, if not him, by his judicial appointments. Biden's are less so and there are a noticeable chunk of Bernie's base that won't vote for Biden as he is seen as a Democrat stooge. That last factor impacted in 2016.
At the end of the day, what happens in November will come down to (a) turnout and (b) how Independents vote. If you are hardcore Republican or Democrat, you will not change your mind nor propensity to vote. But think about independents. As Sir Norfolk says, Trump should get an incumbency boost. He is scoring better than Biden on the economy. Given what is happening in the world, it is hard to argue that it is Trump's fault the economy has gone downhill. People will be looking for who will lead them out economically. I don't see Biden trumping Trump. Add in the China factor and more information (in Der Spiegel) that the Chinese hid information and that is likely to play in his favour.
Then look at Biden. He has put out a fair few incoherent statements that have already been the subject of Republican adverts. As I said last night about the Tara Reade story, and Max PB stated, an increasing number of voters (and these will be people who are disproportionately independents) are unhappy about the seeming hypocrisy of the Democrats in attacking Reade whilst saying Blasey Ford had to be believed. The latest line that nothing happened because Obama vetted him as VP somewhat fell apart when a local newspaper in California found a possible reference in court documents from the 90s. And the Republicans are now making increasing noises about Obama (and Biden) framing Michael Flynn. That won't convince the Dems and it might not convince many independents but it will boost Republican turnout and, if further details emerge about Biden's role, that will cause further controversy.
I wouldn't bet my house on Trump but I certainly wouldn't on Biden. As I said FPT, I think there is good value in putting a 100/1 bet on Harris, Warren or Klobuchar as the Democrat nomination (so betting on JB stepping down) than backing him in November.
Firstly, thank you for your kind assessment of my article.
Regarding our disagreement, I think it comes down to two points which aren't really reconcilable:
1. Whether Biden is particularly weak and has a meaningful risk of being replaced; and 2. Whether the factors you identify re: China, Flynn, Reade, and so on are more or less significant than the ones I pointed to (the general polls, the state polls, Clinton's unusually low favourability, and Trump's entrenched ratings).
On Point 1, I just can't believe Biden will go. I don't think it is impossible, and I accept I don't really have an argument why his risk is so low, but I intuitively feel that it is immensely difficult for a major party to ditch a presumptive nominee these days. 'The machine' is too large to turn around.
On Point 2 I have a slightly different view. I think we can't really reconcile because we don't disagree with anything the other is saying (or not much) but we just value the points differently. And ultimately it is a subjective judgement call on which factors are more important each election, making this a classic situation of 'You may be right, but I think you probably aren't'. It isn't that I think any of what you say is wrong, I just think it is outweighed by other factors. And you think the same of me.
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
Things were done properly. A company who were capable of delivering what was necessary was chosen and said company has delivered.
Max, just because you say that does not mean it was done right in any way. At best it looks dodgy. How lucky that a firm with prominent Tory MP as consultant just happen to be only company invited to have a £133M contract.
They were the only company that put themselves forwards, there's a difference.
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
You made a claim that the contract was somehow inappropriately obtained. I don't think there's any evidence of that, is there?
I made no such claim , I said it looked suspicious, and there is no evidence that it is not inappropriate either , having been done behind closed doors with one company and no tender whatsoever and that company just happening to have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. We will never know as they will have it well hidden.
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
You made a claim that the contract was somehow inappropriately obtained. I don't think there's any evidence of that, is there?
I made no such claim , I said it looked suspicious, and there is no evidence that it is not inappropriate either , having been done behind closed doors with one company and no tender whatsoever and that company just happening to have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. We will never know as they will have it well hidden.
Sorry if I misinterpreted what you said, Malc. I thought you were suggesting that there was some impropriety in the way the contrast was obtained.
Geoff Barton from the Association of School and College Leaders says his organisation is "a bit disappointed" by the guidance that the youngest children are set to be the first to go back to school. He says the younger children are the ones who will find the distancing rules harder to understand - and that they will be harder for teachers to control.
-----
Dickhead....young kids are at zero risk, AND the science appears to show they don't transmit it to adults. You know perhaps Witty and Vallance have looked at the scientific literature on this and not gone well send the rug rats back first for no reason in particular.
I bet if they had said send back older kids first, they would have replied, but they are higher risk to teachers and each other.
The children being non transmitters line has not been pushed as heavily as in the early days, and I've not read up the current state of knowledge. However, a lot of that early truth that was true then wasn't true does turn.out to be true after all.
Each setting is different:
Nurseries: No way kids will social distance, but high staff: child ratios meaning adult-adult close contact difficult to avoid. But, staff generally young and non unionised.
Infants: Social distancing tricky, but anyone who has seen the two-by-two walking knows some corralling is possible. Staff ratios are modestly high, but adult closel contact should be minimisable. Send your younger teachers in.
Juniors: Awareness of social distancing, adult contacts minimisable, not a bad place. The need to socially distance kids from one another is still not necessarily the case.
Secondary: In classrooms social distancing should be OK. The staff room is again key, but
Swedish Mr Witty stated at the weekend, that not a single case of transmission in Nordic "primary" schools from pupils to teachers. The only transmission had been from teacher to teacher.
I would love to know how they could be so confident of that. Although teachers have always been pretty notorious about what they do with their spare time.
So no change to the SI. Unless it is yet to change as of this moment. The current FAQ links to the existing one.
Change in the guidance, however, means you can now do some sports, sit on a bench, or sunbathe (with the same one other person from outside your household) without plod getting involved.
According to the BBC garden Centers are going to be opening from Wednesday: is that right?
Not mentioned in the paper.
But it is in the FAQ:
1.1 What can I do from Wednesday 13 May that I couldn’t do before? There will be a limited number of things you can do on Wednesday that you cannot do now:
spend time outdoors – for example
sitting and enjoying the fresh air, picnicking, or sunbathing
meet one other person from a different household outdoors - following social distancing guidelines
exercise outdoors as often as you wish - following social distancing guidelines
use outdoor sports courts or facilities, such as a tennis or basketball court, or golf course – with members of your household, or one other person while staying 2 metres apart
So no change to the SI. Unless it is yet to change as of this moment. The current FAQ links to the existing one.
Change in the guidance, however, means you can now do some sports, sit on a bench, or sunbathe (with the same one other person from outside your household) without plod getting involved.
Starmer was waving the command paper around. I assume the changes are coming.
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
Things were done properly. A company who were capable of delivering what was necessary was chosen and said company has delivered.
Max, just because you say that does not mean it was done right in any way. At best it looks dodgy. How lucky that a firm with prominent Tory MP as consultant just happen to be only company invited to have a £133M contract.
They were the only company that put themselves forwards, there's a difference.
Firstly, thank you for your kind assessment of my article.
Regarding our disagreement, I think it comes down to two points which aren't really reconcilable:
1. Whether Biden is particularly weak and has a meaningful risk of being replaced; and 2. Whether the factors you identify re: China, Flynn, Reade, and so on are more or less significant than the ones I pointed to (the general polls, the state polls, Clinton's unusually low favourability, and Trump's entrenched ratings).
On Point 1, I just can't believe Biden will go. I don't think it is impossible, and I accept I don't really have an argument why his risk is so low, but I intuitively feel that it is immensely difficult for a major party to ditch a presumptive nominee these days. 'The machine' is too large to turn around.
On Point 2 I have a slightly different view. I think we can't really reconcile because we don't disagree with anything the other is saying (or not much) but we just value the points differently. And ultimately it is a subjective judgement call on which factors are more important each election, making this a classic situation of 'You may be right, but I think you probably aren't'. It isn't that I think any of what you say is wrong, I just think it is outweighed by other factors. And you think the same of me.
Time will tell, and good luck with your betting.
Thank you Quincel and please more articles from you.
According to the BBC garden Centers are going to be opening from Wednesday: is that right?
Not mentioned in the paper.
But it is in the FAQ:
1.1 What can I do from Wednesday 13 May that I couldn’t do before? There will be a limited number of things you can do on Wednesday that you cannot do now:
spend time outdoors – for example
sitting and enjoying the fresh air, picnicking, or sunbathing
meet one other person from a different household outdoors - following social distancing guidelines
exercise outdoors as often as you wish - following social distancing guidelines
use outdoor sports courts or facilities, such as a tennis or basketball court, or golf course – with members of your household, or one other person while staying 2 metres apart
go to a garden centre
I imagine social distancing basketball to be quite a high scoring affair.
He says new advice to wear face coverings on public transport and in enclosed spaces does not include the wearing of medical face masks.
Clearly they think it will cause a shortage for healthcare workers.
As I said down-thread, I bet in the redacted SAGE advice there was probably "masks could be helpful in slowing transmission, but we are feel that there is possibility for panic and hoarding leading to medical personnel shortages"...
No, watch the Van Tam video I linked below. He is quite explicit, he believes what he is saying. He even says "there is no evidence that mask wearing by people who are well has any benefit".
Take a monent and I digest that. It means the deputy chief medical officer for England does not understand the conceot of aymptomatic transmission: the fact you can appear well and feel well but still be shedding viral loads all over the shop.
It is precisely this characteristic which makes coronavirus so dangerous. And our expert does not comprehend this very very basic and important fact.
No wonder the UK has so mightily fucked up its corona response. Our scientists are cretins. After the crisis has ebbed they all need to be cleared out. Get rid, not fit for purpose.
I think that phrase was instead chosen very carefully - the public who are well pose zero risk whether wearing a mask or not (the fact that determining who is well is not really possible is conveniently not addressed). If the evidence of protection for the wearer of a mask is mixed (as I think is still the case, particularly if you consider any old mask rather than ones designed for bio-protection) then the statement is not untrue. So, technically a true statement supporting the policy of not asking public to wear masks, but answering a narrow question that nobody was asking.
On the last paragraph, I don't see convincing evidence (yet) that the UK has done particularly badly*. I don't discount it, but I just don't see the evidence yet. Which scientists do you want kicking out? The ones whose modelling led to the government imposing lock down afterall? I thought you were in favour of that.
* Care homes excepted, although even there it's not obvious that the stupid things they've done are more stupid than other countries.
Intuitively it seems obvious that masks must do some good. A major part of the problem is that lots of medical experts are so in terror of the anecdote police that they travel from the position that RCTs are in many cases the gold standard of evidence to the position that anything which is not an RCT is not evidence at all. It is very difficult to do an RCT of masks. Then again, nobody has done an RCT of the value of parachutes, but there is pretty good intuitive and anecdotal evidence that they are quite a lot better than placebo for those who have to jump out of aeroplanes.
Theonly intuitive argument I can see is overconfidence inspired by mask wearing. As against that, I don't believe compulsory seatbelt wearing has had any such effect, and there is a reasonably compelling counterargument that visible wearing of masks by others will serve to remind the absent minded to socially distance.
Yes, that's the fallacy-trap which Mr Van Tam seems to have fallen into, like the great fat gormless moron he is.
Hang on a second. Isn't that the super-sharp good egg who filleted the dreaded Pesto on live TV just a short while ago?
Seems like they've done pretty well. What's the issue?
You can always trust the Tories to fill their chums pockets, a bigger bunch of crooks you will never find.
Any evidence at all that is what happened here?
they got the contract without any tender, who picked them and why them.
Might be because they were the only company able to do it?
Possibly but highly unlikely.
Possibly they were the only company to tender who had facilities to do the tests. As opposed to football agents etc...
Point was I believe that there was no tender and they have a prominent Tory MP as a consultant. Things should be done properly, these people are so arrogant they just don't care about how anything is perceived..
I have no idea about the specific here.
But Randox is a fantastic company and one of Northern Ireland’s leading businesses. It’s a world leader in molecular diagnostics.
I know you have a very high opinion of Owen Paterson, but I suspect that Randox’s capabilities had more of an impact that him whispering sweet nothings into various ears
Boris calling for the British public's "common sense"
Damn right too!
Yep, once we know that the great British public will voluntarily limit themselves to 3 cream eggs up the bum we can rest easy.
I'm not especially a fan of putting anything up your bum, but if that is what floats your boat then a cream egg as an item that melts sounds like a better idea than plastic or metal objects.
Nothing in the FAQs regarding the furlough scheme.
This is closest it comes, implying (I think) an end to the furlough scheme for all but those who work in sectors that the government is barring from opening:
"4.2 What if they try to fire me because I won’t go to work but cannot work at home?
We urge employers to take socially responsible decisions and listen to the concerns of their staff. Employers and employees should come to a pragmatic agreement about their working arrangements.
If individuals need advice, they should approach ACAS where they can get impartial advice about work disputes."
Devolution is a real mess, isn't it? One of Labour's disasters.
The present problems come down to devolved NHS and in Scotland and especially in Wales they have had problems getting the R rate down, so being able to manage their individual requirements does make sense
So deaths are roughly a quarter of the peak. Object 1: do not allow the NHS to be overwhelmed. Tick. Object 2: reduce the death rate to a more manageable level. Tick (ish). Object 3: find ways of reopening the economy without imperilling objects 1 and 2. Work in progress.
Michael Fabricant's hair even more twatty that Bozza's. Although a good question he asks about hope for a cleaner future as we insist that everyone drive everywhere as you'll catch the pox off the bus
There's a picture of Ian Blackford on teh BBC website being interviewed from home in front of what appears to be a tartan sheet stretched out on the wall behind him
Compare and contrast the ranty absurdity of Jezbollah's question which Bozza just bats away vs the forensic take apart of the massive contradictions in the various bits of government advice
Boris calling for the British public's "common sense"
Damn right too!
Yep, once we know that the great British public will voluntarily limit themselves to 3 cream eggs up the bum we can rest easy.
I'm not especially a fan of putting anything up your bum, but if that is what floats your boat then a cream egg as an item that melts sounds like a better idea than plastic or metal objects.
Devolution is a real mess, isn't it? One of Labour's disasters.
What would your alternative have been?
Tory SOP was to float around and promise all sorts of guff then completely ignore it when in office. I'm sure that would be exactly Nabavi's preferred alternative.
He says new advice to wear face coverings on public transport and in enclosed spaces does not include the wearing of medical face masks.
Clearly they think it will cause a shortage for healthcare workers.
As I said down-thread, I bet in the redacted SAGE advice there was probably "masks could be helpful in slowing transmission, but we are feel that there is possibility for panic and hoarding leading to medical personnel shortages"...
No, watch the Van Tam video I linked below. He is quite explicit, he believes what he is saying. He even says "there is no evidence that mask wearing by people who are well has any benefit".
Take a monent and I digest that. It means the deputy chief medical officer for England does not understand the concept of asymptomatic transmission: the fact you can appear well and feel well but still be shedding viral loads all over the shop - therefore a mask is useful.
It is precisely this characteristic, asymptomatic transmission, which makes coronavirus so uniquely dangerous. And our expert does not comprehend this very very basic and important fact.
No wonder the UK has so mightily fucked up its corona response. Our scientists are cretins. After the crisis has ebbed they all need to be cleared out. Get RID
Or may be he defines “well” as “not having the virus” rather than “having the virus but not having symptoms”
Boris calling for the British public's "common sense"
Damn right too!
Yep, once we know that the great British public will voluntarily limit themselves to 3 cream eggs up the bum we can rest easy.
I'm not especially a fan of putting anything up your bum, but if that is what floats your boat then a cream egg as an item that melts sounds like a better idea than plastic or metal objects.
Takes a while to melt, though, and all the more so if you've put lots up there.
He says new advice to wear face coverings on public transport and in enclosed spaces does not include the wearing of medical face masks.
Clearly they think it will cause a shortage for healthcare workers.
As I said down-thread, I bet in the redacted SAGE advice there was probably "masks could be helpful in slowing transmission, but we are feel that there is possibility for panic and hoarding leading to medical personnel shortages"...
No, watch the Van Tam video I linked below. He is quite explicit, he believes what he is saying. He even says "there is no evidence that mask wearing by people who are well has any benefit".
Take a monent and I digest that. It means the deputy chief medical officer for England does not understand the concept of asymptomatic transmission: the fact you can appear well and feel well but still be shedding viral loads all over the shop - therefore a mask is useful.
It is precisely this characteristic, asymptomatic transmission, which makes coronavirus so uniquely dangerous. And our expert does not comprehend this very very basic and important fact.
No wonder the UK has so mightily fucked up its corona response. Our scientists are cretins. After the crisis has ebbed they all need to be cleared out. Get RID
Or may be he defines “well” as “not having the virus” rather than “having the virus but not having symptoms”
Devolution is a real mess, isn't it? One of Labour's disasters.
What would your alternative have been?
Tory SOP was to float around and promise all sorts of guff then completely ignore it when in office. I'm sure that would be exactly Nabavi's preferred alternative.
Boris calling for the British public's "common sense"
Damn right too!
Yep, once we know that the great British public will voluntarily limit themselves to 3 cream eggs up the bum we can rest easy.
I'm not especially a fan of putting anything up your bum, but if that is what floats your boat then a cream egg as an item that melts sounds like a better idea than plastic or metal objects.
Takes a while to melt, though, and all the more so if you've put lots up there.
Not as long as glass bottles though. I'm not sure why anyone thinks sticking glass up there is a good idea 😱
Comments
"Have you got a cough?"
"No".
"A fever?"
"No".
"OK, so what's the problem then?"
"Gone deaf and my eyeballs are bleeding."
"But no cough or fever?"
Useful discussion.
Intuitively it seems obvious that masks must do some good. A major part of the problem is that lots of medical experts are so in terror of the anecdote police that they travel from the position that RCTs are in many cases the gold standard of evidence to the position that anything which is not an RCT is not evidence at all. It is very difficult to do an RCT of masks. Then again, nobody has done an RCT of the value of parachutes, but there is pretty good intuitive and anecdotal evidence that they are quite a lot better than placebo for those who have to jump out of aeroplanes.
Theonly intuitive argument I can see is overconfidence inspired by mask wearing. As against that, I don't believe compulsory seatbelt wearing has had any such effect, and there is a reasonably compelling counterargument that visible wearing of masks by others will serve to remind the absent minded to socially distance.
People could start mixing in 'bubbles' of family and friends from NEXT MONTH under Boris's roadmap for exiting the lockdown
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8307695/Government-considers-allowing-people-reconnect-close-family-new-Covid-19-lockdown-rules.html
He is not beyond criticism to be fair
(Sorry, this disease of asking stupid questions is just way too contagious....)
We're not one United Kingdom, we've got 4 nations of which 3 make their own decisions. Why should Boris dictate to Sturgeon etc or vice-versa. Does Starmer not understand the concept of devolution?
Regarding our disagreement, I think it comes down to two points which aren't really reconcilable:
1. Whether Biden is particularly weak and has a meaningful risk of being replaced; and
2. Whether the factors you identify re: China, Flynn, Reade, and so on are more or less significant than the ones I pointed to (the general polls, the state polls, Clinton's unusually low favourability, and Trump's entrenched ratings).
On Point 1, I just can't believe Biden will go. I don't think it is impossible, and I accept I don't really have an argument why his risk is so low, but I intuitively feel that it is immensely difficult for a major party to ditch a presumptive nominee these days. 'The machine' is too large to turn around.
On Point 2 I have a slightly different view. I think we can't really reconcile because we don't disagree with anything the other is saying (or not much) but we just value the points differently. And ultimately it is a subjective judgement call on which factors are more important each election, making this a classic situation of 'You may be right, but I think you probably aren't'. It isn't that I think any of what you say is wrong, I just think it is outweighed by other factors. And you think the same of me.
Time will tell, and good luck with your betting.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do/coronavirus-outbreak-faqs-what-you-can-and-cant-do#public-spaces--outdoor-activities--exercise
Change in the guidance, however, means you can now do some sports, sit on a bench, or sunbathe (with the same one other person from outside your household) without plod getting involved.
Damn right too!
1.1 What can I do from Wednesday 13 May that I couldn’t do before?
There will be a limited number of things you can do on Wednesday that you cannot do now:
spend time outdoors – for example
sitting and enjoying the fresh air, picnicking, or sunbathing
meet one other person from a different household outdoors - following social distancing guidelines
exercise outdoors as often as you wish - following social distancing guidelines
use outdoor sports courts or facilities, such as a tennis or basketball court, or golf course – with members of your household, or one other person while staying 2 metres apart
go to a garden centre
100,490 tests
3,877 positive
1,186 Pillar 1
2,691 Pillar 2
Deaths in all settings 210 - lower due to timing issues than:
Deaths in hospital 229
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public#number-of-cases-and-deaths
Garden Centres - woo
For me and the area of my company my team works in, yesterday's announcement essentially changed exactly nothing.
In places like New York you have the Mayor giving press conferences on a regular basis (in addition to obviously the Governor).
Twitter aren't going to like that. It seems like this "use common sense" message was also briefed to journalists.
On the last paragraph, I don't see convincing evidence (yet) that the UK has done particularly badly*. I don't discount it, but I just don't see the evidence yet. Which scientists do you want kicking out? The ones whose modelling led to the government imposing lock down afterall? I thought you were in favour of that.
* Care homes excepted, although even there it's not obvious that the stupid things they've done are more stupid than other countries.
But Randox is a fantastic company and one of Northern Ireland’s leading businesses. It’s a world leader in molecular diagnostics.
I know you have a very high opinion of Owen Paterson, but I suspect that Randox’s capabilities had more of an impact that him whispering sweet nothings into various ears
This is closest it comes, implying (I think) an end to the furlough scheme for all but those who work in sectors that the government is barring from opening:
"4.2 What if they try to fire me because I won’t go to work but cannot work at home?
We urge employers to take socially responsible decisions and listen to the concerns of their staff. Employers and employees should come to a pragmatic agreement about their working arrangements.
If individuals need advice, they should approach ACAS where they can get impartial advice about work disputes."
If Scotland wishes to run its own operation then high time for them to now fund it in full.
Time for them to only get IT, NI, VAT, CT etc raised in Scotland and they then fund everything in Scotland.
They then get charged for share of defence etc.
* that was always a shit point btw. entrepreneur does not mean "entrepreneur."
On which note, what do you call a bloke who scoffs 50 eggs and then throws up all over the place?
Cool Hand Puke -
Ok then....
People do care about a safety net for people who can't support themselves.
But people do not want equality.