Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
1% of GDP is approximately £20bn. My guess is that he will announce (and re-announce in some cases) capital spending of 5-10% of GDP over the next 4 years. How much of this is actually new money will become the debate.
He really thinks the public are idiots. Maybe he's right. Isn't he about to announce new spending worth (puts finger to lips in style of Dr Evil) a quarter of one percent of GDP?
Perhaps his new hero - Roosevelt - supplies the answer.
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
In other words, it's all about positive visualization. We don't need to spend any actual new money - build any actual new things - we simply need to believe it is happening. This in itself will be sufficient to revive the economy.
By this reading - which I think should be taken seriously - people nitpicking about the detail are acting directly against the national interest. Traitors even.
Answering my own question to a degree, if the new State of New Columbia carved out the suburbs of Pennsylvania that are starting to turn that State blue making it a more reliably red state that just might be more sellable. Something similar might be possible with Virginia.
DC doesn't border Pennsylvania, its only borders are with Maryland and Virginia. Maryland is a reliable blue state, and Virginia is becoming so. In any case I suspect changing State boundaries is a non-starter.
If you were to add Fairfax, Arlington and Alexandria (DC proper and burbs) to the 'New Columbia' state it would have made VA
Trump 1578262 Clinton 1477082
I don't doubt it. I just don't think it will happen. US states don't really go in for border changes. WV was carved out of VA of course, but that was in the midst of the Civil War and VA wasn't asked. Alexandria was returned to VA from DC (and DC carved out of VA and MD in the first place) but those were rather special circumstances and a long time ago, so I doubt that carving bits of the Northern VA suburbs out in order to turn VA into a red state will fly. Apart from anything else, if State borders can be moved around that easily, it undermines the case for State sovereignty underlying the electoral college and the malaportionment built into the Senate (although of course that is indefensible anyway, it's just designed to cement the power of white people in general and the ag lobby specifically).
'Excess deaths has now finished and it is a watershed moment'
I presume this is excess deaths for the lasts seven days or something. I would like to see the figures (i.e. I don't believe it) if excess deaths for 2020 is at zero.
Yes those are weekly excess deaths, not 2020 excess deaths.
It would be moderately astonishing if 2020 does not have excess deaths overall but I do wonder if there is going to be some propensity to claw back some of the excess over the next few months.
Many of the Covid deaths were accelerated by a matter of months and there are probably fewer seriously ill people now than average. We are also being a lot more careful about hygiene, and will be even more so if we accept masks. Social distancing will not just stop Covid but a variety of other bugs that carry people off in winter. I really wouldn't be too surprised if we recover a few tens of thousands by the end of December (assuming that there is no second wave of course).
I am (FWIW) slightly pessimistic on that last point. Mask wearing does not seem to have been particularly widely adopted, and when the rules are relaxed, many people's caution seems to go out of the window too. On the other hand, we do have a much improved testing regime, and better capacity for targeted interventions.
I'm not betting on a second wave, but I'm not betting against, either.
A question that occurs to me -
If we go back (pretty much) to how we were before the Lockdown why would the virus not simply take off again? It hasn't changed. We haven't changed. So why not epidemic take two?
Logic says this is what will likely happen unless we now have a level of immunity sufficient for a significant dampening effect. Perhaps we have - but this seems far from certain.
And a second negative thought. The pandemic is accelerating at the global level. Not sure this gets the media attention it merits.
The first question is very germane. The easy of restrictions is the key - we are NOT returning to what we were doing in say January. We are still social distancing (2m where possible, 1m + other safeguards if not). We are all washing hands a lot more (or should be). We are working from home a huge amount more. We are not at football, cricket, concerts, night-clubs etc.
This is why it won't just take off again.
If we did just for feck it, and stop all the mitigation, then yes give it a month and we would be in a mess. Some parts of the USA say hello at that point...
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
The narrative that Nicola Sturgeon is competent and Boris Johnson is incompetent. Are you denying that such a narrative is gaining ground? (The latest GB-wide approval ratings had Sturgeon positive and Johnson negative.)
On topic, I think it's a bit odd not to count Senators who caucus with the Democrats as Democrats for betting purposes. Sanders and King would be, I'd have thought, more reliable votes for the Democrats on most things than red state Democrats like Joe Manchin.
I also slightly dispute OGH's point that, "f indeed Trump is ousted on that day the Democratic victory will only be really meaningful if the party takes the Senate as well." That's an exaggeration because there are significant areas where the President and his appointed administration doesn't need the Senate, and also several Republican Senators who can be worked on in a 51/49 Senate (whether because they - like Joe Biden - are fairly centrist in outlook, or because they can crudely be bought off with pork for their state). It's true a Republican Senate would hamper parts of Biden's agenda, but there would be a meaningful difference in vast swathes of American policy nonetheless.
'Excess deaths has now finished and it is a watershed moment'
I presume this is excess deaths for the lasts seven days or something. I would like to see the figures (i.e. I don't believe it) if excess deaths for 2020 is at zero.
It is clear what the media are going to do now, when excessive deaths go negative, they are going to "lock off" their total around only the period when their were excessive and say 60k over and over again. When that isnt how you use the figures, you have to look at them in the whole.
I don't think that's fair. I think you have to cut off at some point. Over the next century, excess deaths from COVID-19 will be 0 (unless we stay like this forever and it gradually spreads through the world!).
Its not how you use excessive deaths. A significant proportion of those that died were very old and very sick, so died with / of but would have died in the next few weeks and others didn't have it at all. You can't claim both every single excessive death is covid then ignore when goes negative, which is what Ed Conway is doing. He is cherry picking.
Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
The Democrats need to gain the White House and 1 single Senator net to control the Senate effectively, since the Senator from Maine and Sanders do caucus plus the Vice President casts tie breaks.
If the Democrats win a majority in the Senate (by any means) and the White House one of their very first acts should be to admit Puerto Rico and New Columbia as the 51st and 52nd States of the USA.
In the 1840s and 50s there was a careful compromise by which the admission of a "free" state was balanced by the admission of a slave state maintaining the balance under the Douglas Clay compromise. The problem I see with these admissions is that they all favour the Democrats and are likely to do so for the foreseeable. This is going to make Republicans highly resistant to them. This is one of the reasons they are not admitted already of course. I don't think a small majority in the Senate is going to be enough to change this.
I don't think that the Republicans fearing the proposed States will vote for the Democrats is a sufficient reason to deny Statehood to those that deserve it.
Plus given the total war nature of American politics now it doesn't seem like a good reason for the Democrats to refuse to admit them if it is essentially their choice that they can make with a simple majority.
Agreed. The quasi colonial status of Puerto Rico is an ongoing embarrassment, and if Congress were to approve statehood conditional upon approval by referendum of the Puerto Rican voters, I have little doubt that it would be approved.
On topic, I think it's a bit odd not to count Senators who caucus with the Democrats as Democrats for betting purposes. Sanders and King would be, I'd have thought, more reliable votes for the Democrats on most things than red state Democrats like Joe Manchin.
I also slightly dispute OGH's point that, "f indeed Trump is ousted on that day the Democratic victory will only be really meaningful if the party takes the Senate as well." That's an exaggeration because there are significant areas where the President and his appointed administration doesn't need the Senate, and also several Republican Senators who can be worked on in a 51/49 Senate (whether because they - like Joe Biden - are fairly centrist in outlook, or because they can crudely be bought off with pork for their state). It's true a Republican Senate would hamper parts of Biden's agenda, but there would be a meaningful difference in vast swathes of American policy nonetheless.
Plus whom gets appointed to SCOTUS will be very different.
A 51/49 GOP Senate would insist upon a moderate judge from a Democrat President but would not insist upon that from Trump.
No mention of Smarkets? Their rules include Bernie and King as effective Democrats if they caucus, plus the VP as tie breaker counts. I've been betting over there for that reason.
Can you enlighten me on Smarkets, please.
I signed up when they first started but was horrified at their manifest incompetence. They didn't understand even the bascis of betting, so I pulled my cash out pdq. I recall that Guido Fawkes was somehow involved, which might have explained a thing or two. They have however been completely off my radar ever since, and I am surprised they are still going. I assume they must have recruited some proper staff aince their early days.
Evidently some people here do use them. What's the score?
I had an account for a while. I was market making on Betfair and noticed that they were copying my bets (I'd put up £500, they'd put up £328, if take the bet down, there's would disappear) but sometimes you could arb miles away from the Betfair price. I left the account dormant for about a year, then when I tried to bet again they made a big fuss about seeeing proof of funds, and when I provided it they said they were closing the account forever.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Scotland shouldn't be compared to England it should be compared to a region of England as that is comparing like-for-like in population areas.
Many regions of England are at or near zero COVID deaths.
So, you are saying that statistical comparisons can only be made between places of roughy equal population? You can compare Scotland’s performance with Denmark’s, Norway’s or Finland’s, but not with England’s, Turkey’s or Poland’s? That is just daft. If that were the case you could never compare India’s or Greenland’s performances with any other place because no other place is the same size.
'Excess deaths has now finished and it is a watershed moment'
I presume this is excess deaths for the lasts seven days or something. I would like to see the figures (i.e. I don't believe it) if excess deaths for 2020 is at zero.
It is clear what the media are going to do now, when excessive deaths go negative, they are going to "lock off" their total around only the period when their were excessive and say 60k over and over again. When that isnt how you use the figures, you have to look at them in the whole.
I don't think that's fair. I think you have to cut off at some point. Over the next century, excess deaths from COVID-19 will be 0 (unless we stay like this forever and it gradually spreads through the world!).
Its not how you use excessive deaths. A significant proportion of those that died were very old and very sick, so died with / of but would have died in the next few weeks and others didn't have it at all. You can't claim both every single excessive death is covid then ignore when goes negative, which is what Ed Conway is doing. He is cherry picking.
It is why scientists will use the whole year.
If we stick with hand washing and wearing masks over the next several years, and so supress flu deaths as well as COVID-19, there must be a decent chance that we would end up with fewer deaths than we would have otherwise. Of course that's no consulation for anyone affected now, but in the long term public health may well improve substantially.
Maybe it is the first time he's read it. There's that story, which I think Boris tells about himself, about the school play he was in. The one where he didn't bother learning his lines, but stole the show by hamming up the fact that he didn't know them.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Large parts of England are pretty much there already. It’s the misuse of statistics to add to the “England bad, Scotland good“ narrative that a certain section of the media is trying to use to bash the UK government.
Thank you. You do not agree with it, but at least you do acknowledge that such a narrative is current. Philip Thompson is doing a three monkeys act.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Scotland shouldn't be compared to England it should be compared to a region of England as that is comparing like-for-like in population areas.
Many regions of England are at or near zero COVID deaths.
So, you are saying that statistical comparisons can only be made between places of roughy equal population? You can compare Scotland’s performance with Denmark’s, Norway’s or Finland’s, but not with England’s, Turkey’s or Poland’s? That is just daft. If that were the case you could never compare India’s or Greenland’s performances with any other place because no other place is the same size.
Reasonably one can make per capita comparisons over the long term, or need to compare like-for-like.
Scotland is not comparable with England anymore than South West England is.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Large parts of England are pretty much there already. It’s the misuse of statistics to add to the “England bad, Scotland good“ narrative that a certain section of the media is trying to use to bash the UK government.
And I can't help but note that England gets far more international travellers increasing the risk of further outbreaks. Our attitude to quarantine throughout this crisis continues to bewilder me.
“ England gets far more international travellers increasing the risk of further outbreaks”
Now you really are taking the piss. It was the UK Government which kept Heathrow going for far, far too long, letting incoming travellers just saunter straight on to buses, taxis and trains straight in to London and beyond. Criminally insane.
The English government must take responsibility for the dogs’ dinner they have made of things.
"Affordable homes" is an utter misnomer and shouldn't be a planning requirement.
The country doesn't need more homes which are too tiny. The country doesn't need more homes where you can stand in the kitchen and touch all 4 walls without moving.
The country needs more homes and the emphasis should be on GOOD homes. If those homes are not affordable then people who can afford them will get those homes and others can move up the housing ladder into the homes that they have vacated.
Constantly adding trash at the bottom should not be the ambition.
Have you got it on your bedroom wall to give the finger to and laugh at every morning?
"UNDER THE MOON OF LOVE with my PRETTY LITTLE ANGEL EYES!"
I just happen to think it is one of the biggest publicity seeking goofs a politician has ever made. Sorry to all those who disagree with me if my making the point repeatedly upsets you, but that's how it is.
I was told I was the only person thinking this, but I was told BLM weren't anti Semitic marxists who want to defund the police a couple of days ago, and Sir Keir was having to distance himself from them for just those reasons yesterday. So when others back me up, I like to link to it
FWIW, I've always thought him overrated in this respect.
Boris is good at a certain type of speech - one where he's not really saying anything and just needs to be amusing and encourage his supporters. Even then he's always a bit the same.
I don't think even his most dewy-eyed fans would claim he's good at detailed, logically-argued speeches with real content.
Epic speech by Shagger. A BuildBuildBuild lectern that really needed a spirit level. A scything of red tape implemented by tying business up in mega red tape for Brexit. A Banging. Of. The. Lectern. every third sentence. A #JetZero plane powered by Boris spaff presumably. A bonfire of planning regulations allowing Tory party donors to build more houses. Enough money for roads to build 2 miles of motorway and enough money for schools to give them £2k a year for paint.
Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
We have some idea of the overall fatality rate of this thing (somewhere around 0.5%, probably - but varying across different populations), but I don't think we have any good idea at all of the overall incidence of long term health consequences for those who have 'recovered' from infection.
Kuennesberg - allegedly a Tory according to Corbynite foamers - asks Shagger if this is a radical new plan post Covid then why is it all the stuff in your manifesto.
BTW - "Project Speed". Does that refer to the length of time it takes him to pump and dump women? Asking for a friend
Epic speech by Shagger. A BuildBuildBuild lectern that really needed a spirit level. A scything of red tape implemented by tying business up in mega red tape for Brexit. A Banging. Of. The. Lectern. every third sentence. A #JetZero plane powered by Boris spaff presumably. A bonfire of planning regulations allowing Tory party donors to build more houses. Enough money for roads to build 2 miles of motorway and enough money for schools to give them £2k a year for paint.
For anyone who doesn't believe me that £5bn is sod all, it's a grand total of 7% of HS2.
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
The trick with all government numbers is to convert them to per person; I'm sure I'm not telling anyone here something they don't know!
So it's about £100 per head. So it's a moderately nice flatpack wardrobe per person.
Wasn't the ONE MILLION POUNDS thing fatally skewered by the first Austin Powers movie?
Another trick is to give yearly costs as per day, If you want to make it even lower quote it as per person per day.
You can do it the other way round of course. "One coffee a day from Costanero costs over 1000 pounds a year".
My favourite example of playing about with the perception of statistics is lengths make things sound big volumes make things sound small.
If you put every person on earth head to foot you would get to the moon and back over 17 times.
Everyone can on earth fit very easily into the grand canyon, with plenty of living space roughly one large detached house for every person.
Is that true? Jeez how big is the Grand Canyon?? Well of course you have just told me but well I never!!
Yes it is huge, it's 4.17 trillion cubic meters. That figure is so huge I sought a second source for the volume.
Wow!
Clearly you have never seen dawn rise over the Grand Canyon. Bucket list addition.
"Affordable homes" is an utter misnomer and shouldn't be a planning requirement.
The country doesn't need more homes which are too tiny. The country doesn't need more homes where you can stand in the kitchen and touch all 4 walls without moving.
The country needs more homes and the emphasis should be on GOOD homes. If those homes are not affordable then people who can afford them will get those homes and others can move up the housing ladder into the homes that they have vacated.
Constantly adding trash at the bottom should not be the ambition.
An affordable homes policy that works would be to stop a decade of QE inflating house prices and shift the balance of taxation from income towards assets. Wouldnt be popular with the Tory core voters though.
Epic speech by Shagger. A BuildBuildBuild lectern that really needed a spirit level. A scything of red tape implemented by tying business up in mega red tape for Brexit. A Banging. Of. The. Lectern. every third sentence. A #JetZero plane powered by Boris spaff presumably. A bonfire of planning regulations allowing Tory party donors to build more houses. Enough money for roads to build 2 miles of motorway and enough money for schools to give them £2k a year for paint.
I'm tearing up - I'm that inspired.
Jet Zero is a great idea and something I've called for on this site before (but without thinking up that term, what a great term wish I had thought of it).
Idiot Marxists and media types have been attacking aviation under the name of climate change. The solution to climate change is not and never has been us turning into hermits rolling back the industrial revolution while the rest of the world burns coal and moves on without us.
The solution to climate change has only ever been and only ever could be science and technological advancements. Reducing aviation is not a solution to climate change when the Chinese are building a new airport every week.
Inventing an electric or #JetZero plane and exporting that across the globe would be tremendous for climate change.
FWIW, I've always thought him overrated in this respect.
Boris is good at a certain type of speech - one where he's not really saying anything and just needs to be amusing and encourage his supporters. Even then he's always a bit the same.
I don't think even his most dewy-eyed fans would claim he's good at detailed, logically-argued speeches with real content.
Indeed, but he knows this as well. That's why he has Cummings and Gove. They are the Wise to his Morecombe, the.....er.......Little to his Large ...... the....... ..um......Cannon to his Ball.
He's marmite. I think we can agree on that. I like his breezy optimism. I don't trust him to know or care about the finer points. An anti-TMay in every way.
What the fuck are we supposed to make of this jingoistic crap?
That the media are more interested in furiously Tweet-wanking at each other about how evil the PM is, rather than playing their role in helping the country back to economic growth after the crisis?
Indeed, but he knows this as well. That's why he has Cummings and Gove. They are the Wise to his Morecombe, the.....er.......Little to his Large ...... the....... ..um......Cannon to his Ball.
What the fuck are we supposed to make of this jingoistic crap?
That the media are more interested in furiously Tweet-wanking at each other about how evil the PM is, rather than playing their role in helping the country back to economic growth after the crisis?
He's marmite. I think we can agree on that. I like his breezy optimism. I don't trust him to know or care about the finer points. An anti-TMay in every way.
Indeed. He doesn't need to know the finer points.
I like the analogy today in the FT that he's Chairman and Gove is CEO.
The country needs more homes and the emphasis should be on GOOD homes. If those homes are not affordable then people who can afford them will get those homes and others can move up the housing ladder into the homes that they have vacated.
Ye that makes sense. If you have 10 million 50, 100, 150 and 200 sq metre homes (40 mill in total) then building another 10 million 200 sq metre homes would allow 3/4 of the population to enjoy another 50 sq metres. One thing about the USA, even the poor/bad areas tend to have nicish houses in the abstract.
Have you got it on your bedroom wall to give the finger to and laugh at every morning?
It's a thin line between love and hate. I imagine he has a wipe clean version of the picture to hand. Maybe the pervy version where Johnson has him on a leash? That seems to tick a lot of Tory boxes.
Indeed, but he knows this as well. That's why he has Cummings and Gove. They are the Wise to his Morecombe, the.....er.......Little to his Large ...... the....... ..um......Cannon to his Ball.
Or Something
The rod Hull to his Emu
The Keith Harris to his Orvile
The Mr Derek to his Basil Brush....vast spending plan! Boom Boom!
Do you actually watch what is going on in the rest of the world?
But but but Philip Thompson says that you can’t compare English performance with the rest of the world, because the rest of the world is not the same size as England. Or something like that.
FWIW, I've always thought him overrated in this respect.
Boris is good at a certain type of speech - one where he's not really saying anything and just needs to be amusing and encourage his supporters. Even then he's always a bit the same...
I think it depends also on the audience. His schtick has never worked for me at all - and that goes back to his Union days.
Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
Yeah, we've known this for a while. It can make you comatose, give you brain damage, make you prone to dementia, coagulate your blood so it's more likely to give you a stroke or heart attack in the longer run, cause diabetes, and attack lung function long-term.
All of which counts as "zero effect" to some people who want to insist that those who are under-[insert age category that means they're outside it] are all-but unaffected by it. Because they are less likely to actually die.
Here's a story about a 35-year-old who was also "unaffected" by it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53197880 Comatose for seven weeks, looked very likely to die, and in hospital for more than two months. But not in the death statistics, so counts as "unaffected" by some...
Do you actually watch what is going on in the rest of the world?
But but but Philip Thompson says that you can’t compare English performance with the rest of the world, because the rest of the world is not the same size as England. Or something like that.
No mention of Smarkets? Their rules include Bernie and King as effective Democrats if they caucus, plus the VP as tie breaker counts. I've been betting over there for that reason.
Can you enlighten me on Smarkets, please.
I signed up when they first started but was horrified at their manifest incompetence. They didn't understand even the bascis of betting, so I pulled my cash out pdq. I recall that Guido Fawkes was somehow involved, which might have explained a thing or two. They have however been completely off my radar ever since, and I am surprised they are still going. I assume they must have recruited some proper staff aince their early days.
Evidently some people here do use them. What's the score?
I had an account for a while. I was market making on Betfair and noticed that they were copying my bets (I'd put up £500, they'd put up £328, if take the bet down, there's would disappear) but sometimes you could arb miles away from the Betfair price. I left the account dormant for about a year, then when I tried to bet again they made a big fuss about seeeing proof of funds, and when I provided it they said they were closing the account forever.
Not really an exchange
Bunch of charlatans. Wouldn’t touch them with a shitty stick.
Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
Yeah, we've known this for a while. It can make you comatose, give you brain damage, make you prone to dementia, coagulate your blood so it's more likely to give you a stroke or heart attack in the longer run, cause diabetes, and attack lung function long-term.
All of which counts as "zero effect" to some people who want to insist that those who are under-[insert age category that means they're outside it] are all-but unaffected by it. Because they are less likely to actually die.
Here's a story about a 35-year-old who was also "unaffected" by it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53197880 Comatose for seven weeks, looked very likely to die, and in hospital for more than two months. But not in the death statistics, so counts as "unaffected" by some...
Some of these "it doesn't affect people like me" types are going to find it has affected them and given them a lifelong chronic health condition.
Do you actually watch what is going on in the rest of the world?
But but but Philip Thompson says that you can’t compare English performance with the rest of the world, because the rest of the world is not the same size as England. Or something like that.
The point is people are going to watch carnage in the Americas and Africa over the next couple of months on the news, then will look at the UK and think its not been too bad here.
What the fuck are we supposed to make of this jingoistic crap?
That the media are more interested in furiously Tweet-wanking at each other about how evil the PM is, rather than playing their role in helping the country back to economic growth after the crisis?
And what role is that?
As a starting point, actually looking at the announcements made today and being constructive and informative in their analysis of them - as opposed to mindless and sarcastic oppositionism?
Yup, not yet a fan of Boris but he'll get the coveted Edmund in Tokyo endorsement if he gets through the rest of my manifesto, one item per year is fine.
Do you actually watch what is going on in the rest of the world?
But but but Philip Thompson says that you can’t compare English performance with the rest of the world, because the rest of the world is not the same size as England. Or something like that.
The point is people are going to watch carnage in the Americas and Africa over the next couple of months on the news, then will look at the UK and think its not been too bad here.
Indeed. Across the UK the virus is coming under control with some regional variation (eg the SW and Scotland a touch faster than elsewhere) but Stuart is trying to make a narcissm of small differences distinction between England and Scotland that frankly doesn't exist.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Scotland shouldn't be compared to England it should be compared to a region of England as that is comparing like-for-like in population areas.
Many regions of England are at or near zero COVID deaths.
So, you are saying that statistical comparisons can only be made between places of roughy equal population? You can compare Scotland’s performance with Denmark’s, Norway’s or Finland’s, but not with England’s, Turkey’s or Poland’s? That is just daft. If that were the case you could never compare India’s or Greenland’s performances with any other place because no other place is the same size.
Reasonably one can make per capita comparisons over the long term, or need to compare like-for-like.
Scotland is not comparable with England anymore than South West England is.
You just repeating your daft assertion does not make it true.
That narrative has been accepted in Scotland for weeks now, but it is only just beginning to be widely understood in England. Tory backbenchers are not going to be happy bunnies come the autumn.
What narrative?
Excess deaths have ended and besides Leicester we're coming out of lockdown and getting on with things. How does that fit your narrative?
Really stupid cartoon to be running on the day excess deaths figures are reported (from weeks ago) as being negative.
Difference is that Scotland really is at nearly zero deaths from Covid.
The English update is good news, but it's not zero Covid deaths; it's the number of Covid deaths is less than the variability in the baseline. England is getting there, but noticeably more slowly than many of our neighbours.
Scotland shouldn't be compared to England it should be compared to a region of England as that is comparing like-for-like in population areas.
Many regions of England are at or near zero COVID deaths.
So, you are saying that statistical comparisons can only be made between places of roughy equal population? You can compare Scotland’s performance with Denmark’s, Norway’s or Finland’s, but not with England’s, Turkey’s or Poland’s? That is just daft. If that were the case you could never compare India’s or Greenland’s performances with any other place because no other place is the same size.
Reasonably one can make per capita comparisons over the long term, or need to compare like-for-like.
Scotland is not comparable with England anymore than South West England is.
You just repeating your daft assertion does not make it true.
Of course its true people always make comparisons per capita or like-for-like.
"Affordable homes" is an utter misnomer and shouldn't be a planning requirement.
The country doesn't need more homes which are too tiny. The country doesn't need more homes where you can stand in the kitchen and touch all 4 walls without moving.
The country needs more homes and the emphasis should be on GOOD homes. If those homes are not affordable then people who can afford them will get those homes and others can move up the housing ladder into the homes that they have vacated.
Constantly adding trash at the bottom should not be the ambition.
I don't agree. For family support reasons that I won't go into here I need to live in relatively cheap rented accommodation, and have a one-bed cottage semi where I can indeed more or less touch the walls of the kitchen. I'm grateful that I found it for £1000/month and it wasn't easy. This area has very large numbers of large houses for sale which linger on the market for ages, and small numbers of smaller places for rent which are snapped up in days - it's obvious that the latter is the shortage and I know numerous local people who say their kids can't move out and still be local because they simply can't afford it.
In other areas it may be different - perhaps, say, South Shields is short of larger high-quality family homes? Essentially I think the local council should be able to determine what is needed and planning law should be adjusted to enable them to give genuine priority to that. If people aren't happy they can vote them out.
Comments
Breaking news from Sweden: a female patient with mild coronavirus symptoms became unconscious and was admitted to hospital. There it was discovered that she had severe inflammation of the brain (encephalitis). It is strongly suspected that coronavirus caused the inflammation, which would be the first case in the world.
She has survived but she has chronic brain damage.
https://www.cityam.com/budget-2020-sunak-pledges-600bn-in-capital-investment-for-uk-transport-and-industry/
I guess that what we see today, is some flesh on the projects covered by the first tranche of that money.
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
In other words, it's all about positive visualization. We don't need to spend any actual new money - build any actual new things - we simply need to believe it is happening. This in itself will be sufficient to revive the economy.
By this reading - which I think should be taken seriously - people nitpicking about the detail are acting directly against the national interest. Traitors even.
This is why it won't just take off again.
If we did just for feck it, and stop all the mitigation, then yes give it a month and we would be in a mess. Some parts of the USA say hello at that point...
Remember that one he did in front of a backdrop of police last summer?
Give credit where its due, he is.
I also slightly dispute OGH's point that, "f indeed Trump is ousted on that day the Democratic victory will only be really meaningful if the party takes the Senate as well." That's an exaggeration because there are significant areas where the President and his appointed administration doesn't need the Senate, and also several Republican Senators who can be worked on in a 51/49 Senate (whether because they - like Joe Biden - are fairly centrist in outlook, or because they can crudely be bought off with pork for their state). It's true a Republican Senate would hamper parts of Biden's agenda, but there would be a meaningful difference in vast swathes of American policy nonetheless.
It is why scientists will use the whole year.
No.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1277912463745388545
The quasi colonial status of Puerto Rico is an ongoing embarrassment, and if Congress were to approve statehood conditional upon approval by referendum of the Puerto Rican voters, I have little doubt that it would be approved.
https://twitter.com/Dr2NisreenAlwan/status/1277860701919498241
A 51/49 GOP Senate would insist upon a moderate judge from a Democrat President but would not insist upon that from Trump.
Not really an exchange
Great speech.
Except for the getting down on his knees, then having to explain why he didn't really mean it
FWIW, I've always thought him overrated in this respect.
The child, as they say, is the father to the man.
Scotland is not comparable with England anymore than South West England is.
Now you really are taking the piss. It was the UK Government which kept Heathrow going for far, far too long, letting incoming travellers just saunter straight on to buses, taxis and trains straight in to London and beyond. Criminally insane.
The English government must take responsibility for the dogs’ dinner they have made of things.
The country doesn't need more homes which are too tiny. The country doesn't need more homes where you can stand in the kitchen and touch all 4 walls without moving.
The country needs more homes and the emphasis should be on GOOD homes. If those homes are not affordable then people who can afford them will get those homes and others can move up the housing ladder into the homes that they have vacated.
Constantly adding trash at the bottom should not be the ambition.
"UNDER THE MOON OF LOVE with my PRETTY LITTLE ANGEL EYES!"
I just happen to think it is one of the biggest publicity seeking goofs a politician has ever made. Sorry to all those who disagree with me if my making the point repeatedly upsets you, but that's how it is.
I was told I was the only person thinking this, but I was told BLM weren't anti Semitic marxists who want to defund the police a couple of days ago, and Sir Keir was having to distance himself from them for just those reasons yesterday. So when others back me up, I like to link to it
I don't think even his most dewy-eyed fans would claim he's good at detailed, logically-argued speeches with real content.
I'm tearing up - I'm that inspired.
Encephalitis as a clinical manifestation of COVID-19
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7146652/
We know for sure that it attacks the olfactory bulb, and there ia considerable evidence of its crossing the blood brain barrier;
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200622-the-long-term-effects-of-covid-19-infection
We have some idea of the overall fatality rate of this thing (somewhere around 0.5%, probably - but varying across different populations), but I don't think we have any good idea at all of the overall incidence of long term health consequences for those who have 'recovered' from infection.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jun/30/melbourne-hotspot-lockdowns-announced-as-victoria-battles-coronavirus-outbreaks
https://twitter.com/charlotteahenry/status/1277911876433842176
BTW - "Project Speed". Does that refer to the length of time it takes him to pump and dump women? Asking for a friend
https://twitter.com/skynewsniall/status/1277911760536821760
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1277915563621257218
What the fuck are we supposed to make of this jingoistic crap?
Idiot Marxists and media types have been attacking aviation under the name of climate change. The solution to climate change is not and never has been us turning into hermits rolling back the industrial revolution while the rest of the world burns coal and moves on without us.
The solution to climate change has only ever been and only ever could be science and technological advancements. Reducing aviation is not a solution to climate change when the Chinese are building a new airport every week.
Inventing an electric or #JetZero plane and exporting that across the globe would be tremendous for climate change.
Or Something
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1277914977903443969
I like his breezy optimism. I don't trust him to know or care about the finer points. An anti-TMay in every way.
The Keith Harris to his Orvile
I like the analogy today in the FT that he's Chairman and Gove is CEO.
One thing about the USA, even the poor/bad areas tend to have nicish houses in the abstract.
His schtick has never worked for me at all - and that goes back to his Union days.
All of which counts as "zero effect" to some people who want to insist that those who are under-[insert age category that means they're outside it] are all-but unaffected by it. Because they are less likely to actually die.
Here's a story about a 35-year-old who was also "unaffected" by it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53197880
Comatose for seven weeks, looked very likely to die, and in hospital for more than two months.
But not in the death statistics, so counts as "unaffected" by some...
The government this summer will create a new science funding agency to back "high risk, high reward" projects, he pledges.
https://twitter.com/edmundedgar/status/1204566056829800448
In other areas it may be different - perhaps, say, South Shields is short of larger high-quality family homes? Essentially I think the local council should be able to determine what is needed and planning law should be adjusted to enable them to give genuine priority to that. If people aren't happy they can vote them out.