Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov poll has the Tories back with a double digit lead

13

Comments

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
  • DjayMDjayM Posts: 21
    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fieldwork mostly done after more Sunak cash dispensing and acres of positive headlines about it, too.

    So what.. its a double digit lead. Where is CHB when you need him, predicting crossover v soon.... (was it just for best PM or voting int as well?)

    It's MoE on the previous YouGov. The Tory leads are currently in the four to 10 point range. I'll take that right now given where things were in March, especially as there is decent progress from December (4 to 7 points, depending on the pollster).

    That may be true , but its TEN points yes 10 points. if you are happy to take that , then bless you... Starmer has had it easy as you like, the Tories have worked him out, it isn't going to be plain sailing for either party.....

    I agree. Starmer has to be more than not Jeremy Corbyn. The Tories have a depression and a potential No Deal with the EU to steer us through. Politics is going to be very interesting.
    And of course the rest of the EU face a depression and no deal to steer through

    It is not going to be pretty for any government

    It was good to see Mark Drakeford, Wales FM, resolutely defending the union today and this is consistent with Starmer's support for the union.

    Stark contrast with Sturgeon who has been trying to use Wales to attack Westminster
    Why oh why isn't the leader of the SNP resolutely defending the union? It's an absolute disgrace, so it is.
    She is on her own as far as Wales is concerned
    Perhaps because the Scots remember a time where they were not joined at the hip to England? The Welsh have had a few hundred years more to get used to the experience...
    There is no real appetite for an Independent Wales. That will change when unfortunately Scotland leave the Union.
    Wales voted Leave just like England and more English voters now want an independent England than Welsh voters want an independent Wales anyway

    https://twitter.com/dgwbirch/status/1279084991327199234?s=20

    Indyref2 will of course be banned for as long as the Tories remain in power
    If you read my first post on this subject I stated there is currently no appetite for Welsh Independence, my point was, there will be when Scotland and Northern Ireland have left

    And your Boris will ban a referendum before 2024. It will be the Labour government in 2024 that presides over the break up of the union, I believe are notions that will come back to bite you.
    There won't be, as I showed England will vote to leave the Union before Wales, so if the Union ends it will be Wales left standing for the Union to the last.

    You can think what you want, the Tories will ban indyref2 as per their 2019 manifesto up until 2024 with or without a nationalist Holyrood majority next year, if Starmer wishes to allow an indyref2 after that is up to him but I would not guarantee a Yes vote in that circumstance, especially as he would take the UK back into the single market anyway and offer devomax
    Johnson will have so ticked off Scotland by 2024 that Starmer offering 50% off dining out vouchers won't change enough minds. The answer will be yes!
    In your view because you are weak and give in to Nats, I never give in to Nats no matter what the cost.
    The Scottish people elect an endless succession of Nationalist Governments, the entire purpose of which are to break up the Union. Many, perhaps most, Nat voters also actively detest us.

    Why, therefore, are you so desperate not to let them simply go and do their own thing? What is the damned point? Stubbornness?
    Yes and they will go on hating us regardless, 45% of Scots at least are Nationalists (and the majority of Yes voting Glasgow) and many of them do hate the English, especially Tory voting English that will not change however much we try and appease them. It is the 55% who voted No in 2014 we need to focus on keeping.

    As a Unionist I respect the views of the 55% who voted to stay in the UK in a 'once in a generation' referendum in 2014, Scotland provides a great deal to the UK from oil and renewable energy, to culture, to ancient universities and financial services and whiskey and army regiments and we should do what we can to retain it.
    Whiskey?

    Regiments plural?

    No,. it doesn't.
    Just appreciate the knowledge and insights into a far away country & of people of whom he knows nothing.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fieldwork mostly done after more Sunak cash dispensing and acres of positive headlines about it, too.

    So what.. its a double digit lead. Where is CHB when you need him, predicting crossover v soon.... (was it just for best PM or voting int as well?)

    It's MoE on the previous YouGov. The Tory leads are currently in the four to 10 point range. I'll take that right now given where things were in March, especially as there is decent progress from December (4 to 7 points, depending on the pollster).

    That may be true , but its TEN points yes 10 points. if you are happy to take that , then bless you... Starmer has had it easy as you like, the Tories have worked him out, it isn't going to be plain sailing for either party.....

    I agree. Starmer has to be more than not Jeremy Corbyn. The Tories have a depression and a potential No Deal with the EU to steer us through. Politics is going to be very interesting.
    And of course the rest of the EU face a depression and no deal to steer through

    It is not going to be pretty for any government

    It was good to see Mark Drakeford, Wales FM, resolutely defending the union today and this is consistent with Starmer's support for the union.

    Stark contrast with Sturgeon who has been trying to use Wales to attack Westminster
    Why oh why isn't the leader of the SNP resolutely defending the union? It's an absolute disgrace, so it is.
    She is on her own as far as Wales is concerned
    Perhaps because the Scots remember a time where they were not joined at the hip to England? The Welsh have had a few hundred years more to get used to the experience...
    There is no real appetite for an Independent Wales. That will change when unfortunately Scotland leave the Union.
    Wales voted Leave just like England and more English voters now want an independent England than Welsh voters want an independent Wales anyway

    https://twitter.com/dgwbirch/status/1279084991327199234?s=20

    Indyref2 will of course be banned for as long as the Tories remain in power
    If you read my first post on this subject I stated there is currently no appetite for Welsh Independence, my point was, there will be when Scotland and Northern Ireland have left

    And your Boris will ban a referendum before 2024. It will be the Labour government in 2024 that presides over the break up of the union, I believe are notions that will come back to bite you.
    There won't be, as I showed England will vote to leave the Union before Wales, so if the Union ends it will be Wales left standing for the Union to the last.

    You can think what you want, the Tories will ban indyref2 as per their 2019 manifesto up until 2024 with or without a nationalist Holyrood majority next year, if Starmer wishes to allow an indyref2 after that is up to him but I would not guarantee a Yes vote in that circumstance, especially as he would take the UK back into the single market anyway and offer devomax
    Johnson will have so ticked off Scotland by 2024 that Starmer offering 50% off dining out vouchers won't change enough minds. The answer will be yes!
    In your view because you are weak and give in to Nats, I never give in to Nats no matter what the cost.
    The Scottish people elect an endless succession of Nationalist Governments, the entire purpose of which are to break up the Union. Many, perhaps most, Nat voters also actively detest us.

    Why, therefore, are you so desperate not to let them simply go and do their own thing? What is the damned point? Stubbornness?
    Yes and they will go on hating us regardless, 45% of Scots at least are Nationalists (and the majority of Yes voting Glasgow) and many of them do hate the English, especially Tory voting English that will not change however much we try and appease them. It is the 55% who voted No in 2014 we need to focus on keeping.

    As a Unionist I respect the views of the 55% who voted to stay in the UK in a 'once in a generation' referendum in 2014, Scotland provides a great deal to the UK from oil and renewable energy, to culture, to ancient universities and financial services and whiskey and army regiments and we should do what we can to retain it.
    Unfortunately it also complains endlessly and loudly about how shit we are and sends us a large cohort of Nationalist MPs to sit in Parliament which, thanks to the profound uselessness of every UK Government from 1997 onwards, grants them the ability to meddle in an enormous range of our domestic business that no longer directly affects them. That's going to be real fun in another four years if, and this is a serious possibility, we end up with a Labour minority Government puppeteered by Nicola Sturgeon.

    The solution to all of this is, of course, to be done with the Union. In an ideal world I'd rather than it wasn't - and maybe if the Blair Government's programme of constitutional arson had actually been thought through properly then things might now be very different - but we are already well past the point at which it was last salvageable. For Britain, asymmetric devolution plus 45% Yes vote = terminal decrepitude.
    You, er, do know what Mr Cameron did the morning after indyref 1?

    In any case, it was the Unionist MPs of Scotland whjich meddled in "our" domestic business (Logivally enough I suppose), rather than the SNP ones, who espoused a self-denying ordinance (except where it affected the Barnett formula or it had a direct knockon effect on Scotland in some other sense).
    The SNP are politicians like all the rest of them. Any "principles" they espouse are liable to be junked the nanosecond they cease to be electorally expedient.

    If they find themselves controlling the balance of power come 2024 then they will follow Labour through the voting lobbies 100% of the time, provided that Labour gives them what they want. Which is why it would therefore be better for everyone if Johnson conceded the second referendum after the inevitable SNP landslide next year, and then lost.

    It is, of course, precisely because he is afraid of losing (and can use the SNP as a stick with which to beat Starmer in England) that HYUFD is right and Indyref2 won't happen until Labour has the votes to deliver it. And thus we return to the original point. Labour gives the SNP what it wants, the SNP votes through Labour's English legislation.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Singing Britain rules the waves does make us look somewhat silly these days although the song is very stirring
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Obviously it is a very small sample, so no firm conclusions can be drawn, but looking at the Tory leads since Starmer took over, it isn't as though YouGov particularly favour them


  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482
    nichomar said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Singing Britain rules the waves does make us look somewhat silly these days although the song is very stirring
    When that song was first written, it was advice 'rule the waves' because we didn't at the time. It was a patriotic but seditious enjoinder to stop fighting land wars (like the war of the French succession) and become a naval power. So maybe we should just remove the 's' again.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited July 2020
    isam said:

    Obviously it is a very small sample, so no firm conclusions can be drawn, but looking at the Tory leads since Starmer took over, it isn't as though YouGov particularly favour them


    Same can be said for the Tory share of the vote.


  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Possibly the least surprising revelation ever.

    This paragraph from Richard Morrison sums up the Wokeists' contempt for ordinary people. Not only are they not regular Prom-goers like the great (?) man, they dare to experience feelings of patriotism that are not 'ironic':

    'I look around me - particularly at the people sitting in the posh seats whom I've never seen at any other Proms - and realise that I can detect absolutely no sign of irony as they roar out these crudely jingoistic texts. On the contrary, they seem to mean every single word...'

    Get stuffed, Richard, there's a good fellow.
    I will concede you half a point here. Too much self-conscious irony is a barrier to expression and fun. But this is nothing to do with "woke". In fact I think you should exercise some free expression of your own and break out of the mental chains which cause you to try and make anything and everything about this.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    MaxPB said:

    I also think that permanently WFH is bad for the soul, it limits general interaction with colleagues and friends to specific "fun" days which are prearranged. Honestly, I've made friends for life at my workplace, it wouldn't have been possible without the ability to just go to lunch together or go to the pub after work on Thursday and Friday. A bunch of us went on holiday together last year and had a great time, you couldn't do that without the social aspect of working together and generally being around each other all day.

    Again, it might be the industry/level I'm in which is mainly staffed by people in my age bracket with similar interests but I'd definitely miss it if the company decided to ditch the office and just did a WeWork a few times a month. Thankfully I'm not sure it's possible given our new building is just finished.

    Post of the week. :+1:

    I think all this talk of permanently working from home is bonkers.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Obviously it is a very small sample, so no firm conclusions can be drawn, but looking at the Tory leads since Starmer took over, it isn't as though YouGov particularly favour them


    Same can be said for the Tory share of the vote.


    YouGov just seem less swingy than the others. Opinium have had Labour as low as 29 and as high as 40, Kantar had 28 on one occasion. YG's range has been 30-38 with an average of 35 which is, coincidentally, the average of Labour's scores since Sir Keir became their leader.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    MaxPB said:

    I also think that permanently WFH is bad for the soul, it limits general interaction with colleagues and friends to specific "fun" days which are prearranged. Honestly, I've made friends for life at my workplace, it wouldn't have been possible without the ability to just go to lunch together or go to the pub after work on Thursday and Friday. A bunch of us went on holiday together last year and had a great time, you couldn't do that without the social aspect of working together and generally being around each other all day.

    Again, it might be the industry/level I'm in which is mainly staffed by people in my age bracket with similar interests but I'd definitely miss it if the company decided to ditch the office and just did a WeWork a few times a month. Thankfully I'm not sure it's possible given our new building is just finished.

    Yes, that is definitely a positive about workling in an office rather than from home. I used to work in a trading room, and missed the banter when I first worked at home. But it's not for employers to sort employee's social lives is it? Things adapt, maybe people will socialise in their own community more
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,951
    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,680
    Scott_xP said:
    It's all like some grim Groundhog Day when Boris keeps getting 'Brexit done' for ever. Presumably 'bung a bob for the Big Ben bong' will be coming around again shortly.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478

    MaxPB said:

    I also think that permanently WFH is bad for the soul, it limits general interaction with colleagues and friends to specific "fun" days which are prearranged. Honestly, I've made friends for life at my workplace, it wouldn't have been possible without the ability to just go to lunch together or go to the pub after work on Thursday and Friday. A bunch of us went on holiday together last year and had a great time, you couldn't do that without the social aspect of working together and generally being around each other all day.

    Again, it might be the industry/level I'm in which is mainly staffed by people in my age bracket with similar interests but I'd definitely miss it if the company decided to ditch the office and just did a WeWork a few times a month. Thankfully I'm not sure it's possible given our new building is just finished.

    Post of the week. :+1:

    I think all this talk of permanently working from home is bonkers.
    Some people work just about all the time, or rather are "on call" to their muse 24/7/365. I refer to thinkers, however one wishes to understand the term.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999

    nichomar said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Singing Britain rules the waves does make us look somewhat silly these days although the song is very stirring
    When that song was first written, it was advice 'rule the waves' because we didn't at the time. It was a patriotic but seditious enjoinder to stop fighting land wars (like the war of the French succession) and become a naval power. So maybe we should just remove the 's' again.
    Written by a Jock as well.

    '"predicated on a mixture of adulterated mercantilism, nationalistic anxiety and libertarian fervour"

    Plus ça change.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Scott_xP said:
    Well, it should really be called Get Ready for No Deal Disaster, but that would give Dom's game away and he does like to think he is several moves ahead of the rest of us.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    Or the great supermarket delivery shortage of April 2020.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,222
    Preclinical, so not yet really in the race, but pretty cool vaccine candidate:

    Self-amplifying RNA SARS-CoV-2 lipid nanoparticle vaccine candidate induces high neutralizing antibody titers in mice
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17409-9
    The spread of the SARS-CoV-2 into a global pandemic within a few months of onset motivates the development of a rapidly scalable vaccine. Here, we present a self-amplifying RNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein encapsulated within a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) as a vaccine. We observe remarkably high and dose-dependent SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody titers in mouse sera, as well as robust neutralization of both a pseudo-virus and wild-type virus. Upon further characterization we find that the neutralization is proportional to the quantity of specific IgG and of higher magnitude than recovered COVID-19 patients. saRNA LNP immunizations induce a Th1-biased response in mice, and there is no antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) observed. Finally, we observe high cellular responses, as characterized by IFN-γ production, upon re-stimulation with SARS-CoV-2 peptides. These data provide insight into the vaccine design and evaluation of immunogenicity to enable rapid translation to the clinic.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    edited July 2020
    nichomar said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Singing Britain rules the waves does make us look somewhat silly these days although the song is very stirring
    It has a certain presence and many people do seem to enjoy belting it out.

    I'd need paying though.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    Me too. Damn: it's getting darker earlier.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kinabalu said:

    nichomar said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Singing Britain rules the waves does make us look somewhat silly these days although the song is very stirring
    It has a certain presence and many people do seem to enjoy belting it out.

    I'd need paying though.
    I won’t sing Land of Hope .......
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
    Which vaccine are they buying though? We've already secured priority delivery of the Oxford vaccine, close to securing the Imperial vaccine as a priority as well and I'm sure the Americans will be happy to trade their efforts for ours so we each get the number two positions.

    I think the German vaccine candidate is set for phase 1 trials soon or have just started, but that puts it months behind the Oxford team and I think it's on a schedule for the middle of next year not the end of this one.

    Vaccines are one area the UK government has absolutely nailed IMO and continues to do so.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    "We give £3.50 for a coffee on the way to work each morning.
    Let's WFH and make it ourselves."
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,528
    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    I thought the scheme was an attempt to pre-empt a repeat of the unedifying spectacle we saw at the peak of the COVID crisis, where governments were tearing up contract law to prevent PPE leaving their territory.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
    Which vaccine are they buying though? We've already secured priority delivery of the Oxford vaccine, close to securing the Imperial vaccine as a priority as well and I'm sure the Americans will be happy to trade their efforts for ours so we each get the number two positions.

    I think the German vaccine candidate is set for phase 1 trials soon or have just started, but that puts it months behind the Oxford team and I think it's on a schedule for the middle of next year not the end of this one.

    Vaccines are one area the UK government has absolutely nailed IMO and continues to do so.
    Great if it all works, but I can't help feeling you may have put the cart before the horse here.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited July 2020
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Possibly the least surprising revelation ever.

    This paragraph from Richard Morrison sums up the Wokeists' contempt for ordinary people. Not only are they not regular Prom-goers like the great (?) man, they dare to experience feelings of patriotism that are not 'ironic':

    'I look around me - particularly at the people sitting in the posh seats whom I've never seen at any other Proms - and realise that I can detect absolutely no sign of irony as they roar out these crudely jingoistic texts. On the contrary, they seem to mean every single word...'

    Get stuffed, Richard, there's a good fellow.
    I will concede you half a point here. Too much self-conscious irony is a barrier to expression and fun. But this is nothing to do with "woke". In fact I think you should exercise some free expression of your own and break out of the mental chains which cause you to try and make anything and everything about this.
    It may be woke, or it may just be the common leftwing 'intellectual' contempt for Britain and its history - don't make me quote Orwell's 'The Lion and the Unicorn' again - but either way it's utterly contemptible and frankly disqualifies those who think like that from the government of the country.

    Yes, some people actually love this country and its traditions in an entirely unironic fashion, and that's perfectly all right and normal. People like Morrison are the fringe loons who presume in their arrogance to dictate to the mainstream.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    I thought the scheme was an attempt to pre-empt a repeat of the unedifying spectacle we saw at the peak of the COVID crisis, where governments were tearing up contract law to prevent PPE leaving their territory.
    It's a collective buying scheme and yes, one of the terms of the scheme is that any vaccine deliveries that a country has secured needs to be given up to the scheme which the EU will then distribute, so if Italy secures 50m doses of the Imperial vaccine due for delivery in February and March, those 50m become part of the EU scheme and the EU will decide how they are distributed. The UK has secured around 80m doses of different vaccines so far and is negotiating for loads more all over the world. We have no need to be in this scheme.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    I'm restocking my Brexit boxes slowly.

    Meds is another issue though.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Very OT -
    Songs of the Battle Ground States 2020

    THERE’S A PANTHER IN MICHIGAN
    Michael Peter Smith (to the tune of "Whiskey in the Jar")

    There's an awful lot of cover
    Down along the Raisin river
    We would set up on the one side
    He'd show up on the other
    I know people used to wonder
    Why we couldn't catch the panther
    Well, there's an awful lot of cover
    Down along the Raisin river

    When a farmer in Manchester called
    I was there in minutes,
    Following the trail of feathers
    Through the high grass when he screamed.
    Thirty-four years in law enforcement
    I've never been so scared.
    I could see where he was going
    by the way the grass was moving

    There's a panther in Michigan
    Don't that make your Halloween?
    There's a panther in Michigan
    Although he is seldom seen
    And he's following the water
    In the ways of the Indian,
    And he's crossing the border
    To Indiana

    Now, people who know panthers
    Say that they are lazy hunters,
    And they'll take a prey that's wounded
    Over one that's healthy
    And he might take a child
    Playing in a sand-box
    For some kind of wounded critter
    Down along the Raisin river

    Test drivers saw the panther
    At the Chrysler proving grounds
    It was during hunting season
    He was out there on the track
    And he knew if he went in there
    he'd be safe from hunters
    He's an uncanny animal

    There's a panther in Michigan
    Don't that make your Halloween?
    There's a panther in Michigan
    Although he is seldom seen
    And he's following the water
    In the ways of the Indian,
    And he's crossing the border
    To Indiana
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    No fair enough. But I'm not ashamed of those Proms scenes I just feel a bit squirmy and embarrassed to watch them. Should I be ashamed of feeling embarrassed? I don't think so. It's just how it impacts me. Why then do I tune in and expose myself to it? That's a very good question that I cannot answer to my own satisfaction let alone anybody else's.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    Quite right. I prefer to believe that the glass is always half-full. It just so happens that it's often half-full of piss...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    I'm restocking my Brexit boxes slowly.

    Meds is another issue though.
    Yes, I am getting my panic buying in six months early too.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,060

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    We're going to reduce Red Tape for business, by massively increasing Red Tape.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    stodge said:

    MaxPB said:


    I think people should be, WFH limits the dynamism of companies. We all already feel it, not being able to bounce ideas off each other over a coffee after lunch etc... has given us much less creativity. Maybe in your sector it's different but it's becoming a big deal for us, we're now trying 2-3h per day of having zoom on for everyone in the team in the background to see if that helps but so far it's not the same.

    It's about adaptation and evolution and in my view transcends physical proximity. If you all need to brainstorm regularly I understand the limitations of Zoom, Livestorm or even MS Teams but is it so limiting as to make physical proximity the preferred option?

    There are colleagues with whom I'd love to enjoy a coffee and a chat - I have to do that virtually. It's not the same but it's not that different.

    Surely the greatest advantage is with the colleagues you can't abide.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
    Which vaccine are they buying though? We've already secured priority delivery of the Oxford vaccine, close to securing the Imperial vaccine as a priority as well and I'm sure the Americans will be happy to trade their efforts for ours so we each get the number two positions.

    I think the German vaccine candidate is set for phase 1 trials soon or have just started, but that puts it months behind the Oxford team and I think it's on a schedule for the middle of next year not the end of this one.

    Vaccines are one area the UK government has absolutely nailed IMO and continues to do so.
    Great if it all works, but I can't help feeling you may have put the cart before the horse here.
    The whole point is that the EU are buying the same vaccines that we have already secured priority access to. We have spent a lot of money in this area and we have a world class research sector and a world class pharmaceutical sector. This scheme would have given up our priority access purchases and put them in the hands of the EU, why would we do that?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    This is probably fair enough. Although in my defence I'm a good deal worse at the moment because my employer has announced a round of mass sackings, and if I'm one of the victims then God only knows how long I'll be on the scrapheap for.

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    I'm restocking my Brexit boxes slowly.
    I actually kept one of mine; it mostly contains tins and a couple of packets of pasta, but I'll have to check the use by dates on the biscuits come the Autumn as they'll probably need eating and replacing.

    If things look iffy by about October time then it may be a case of starting to refill the second one, as well as buying a couple of large packs of bog roll before all that nonsense kicks off again.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited July 2020
    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    As others have noted, it's an instruction - Britannia rule the waves - not a statement.

    What does seem a bit rich is claiming that Britons never shall be slaves in 1745, the absolute peak of the UK slave trade. The song should continue "but all other nationalities are up for grabs."
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    Scott_xP said:
    27 acres isn't very big. Don't 10 000 lorries go via Dover each day. The site must be one of many as it probably could only take 1-2% of those at any one time.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,240

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    Quite right. I prefer to believe that the glass is always half-full. It just so happens that it's often half-full of piss...
    Not until January 2021, I hope.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    Quite right. I prefer to believe that the glass is always half-full. It just so happens that it's often half-full of piss...
    Best stop drinking in Spoons then.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    So is Boris Johnson preparing to take on the REAL Covid-19 revolutionaries? Not of course those who dislike statues or the "woke" (whoever they are), but those who have discovered the real joys of home working.

    In a typically muddled and confusing response which will no doubt require some poor Cabinet member to go out and issue a "clarification", we are told we "should go back to work if we can".

    There's also some nonsense about "normality" - doesn't he realise the world has changed? Many people have tried home working and they like it - many businesses have found home working works so why do companies and councils spend millions on office accommodation that is no longer required?

    Why get up at the crack of the dawn, dress up and then slog down to the station or bus stop or through the traffic just to get to work? A 100-minute commute can be a 100-second commute and it can be far more relaxing and less stressful.

    If the Government wanted to do something useful, it should recognise what has happened - encourage house builders to put home officers rather than extra bedrooms in properties.Perhaps that will happen with the redundant city and town centre office blocks which can be converted to residential accommodation.

    Unfortunately, Boris is so far behind the curve as to be out of sight and it's disappointing there is no Minister in charge of leading the revolution but perhaps it's also an example most people don't need Government to get things done.

    You clearly don't have children or animals. A two hour commute to avoid them seems like a small price to pay.
    Give it a few years and entrepreneurs will probably have built or converted little office buildings in every town of what was the commuter belt, in order to accommodate various grumps and stick-in-the-mud suit traditionalists of the kind that you describe. If there are enough folk out there desperate to do office jobs in an office rather than their own homes, but where their employer no longer bothers to maintain one, then the market will probably step in and provide a solution (if those persons are willing to part with some percentage of what they would once have spent on nasty sweaty cattle truck train commutes for the dubious privilege.)
    We started doing that 3 years ago. Locations in Cambridge, Mortlake, Newbury at the moment.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    No fair enough. But I'm not ashamed of those Proms scenes I just feel a bit squirmy and embarrassed to watch them. Should I be ashamed of feeling embarrassed? I don't think so. It's just how it impacts me. Why then do I tune in and expose myself to it? That's a very good question that I cannot answer to my own satisfaction let alone anybody else's.
    The last night of the proms looks like my vision of hell. Its pretty easy to avoid though.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
    Realistically the pubs and restaurants have to be exempt because you can't expect the clientele to eat and drink through a bloody mask.

    This might even be part of a fiendish ploy to encourage people to patronise certain venues. I can just see the miserable bastards deciding that wouldn't it be a brilliant idea to force the population to wear the wretched things everywhere - EXCEPT in pubs, restaurants and (possibly) gyms? You thus incentivize the use of these facilities because they're the only places outside your own house where you can go without being forced to strap a bit of cloth over your face the whole time.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    So is Boris Johnson preparing to take on the REAL Covid-19 revolutionaries? Not of course those who dislike statues or the "woke" (whoever they are), but those who have discovered the real joys of home working.

    In a typically muddled and confusing response which will no doubt require some poor Cabinet member to go out and issue a "clarification", we are told we "should go back to work if we can".

    There's also some nonsense about "normality" - doesn't he realise the world has changed? Many people have tried home working and they like it - many businesses have found home working works so why do companies and councils spend millions on office accommodation that is no longer required?

    Why get up at the crack of the dawn, dress up and then slog down to the station or bus stop or through the traffic just to get to work? A 100-minute commute can be a 100-second commute and it can be far more relaxing and less stressful.

    If the Government wanted to do something useful, it should recognise what has happened - encourage house builders to put home officers rather than extra bedrooms in properties.Perhaps that will happen with the redundant city and town centre office blocks which can be converted to residential accommodation.

    Unfortunately, Boris is so far behind the curve as to be out of sight and it's disappointing there is no Minister in charge of leading the revolution but perhaps it's also an example most people don't need Government to get things done.

    You clearly don't have children or animals. A two hour commute to avoid them seems like a small price to pay.
    Give it a few years and entrepreneurs will probably have built or converted little office buildings in every town of what was the commuter belt, in order to accommodate various grumps and stick-in-the-mud suit traditionalists of the kind that you describe. If there are enough folk out there desperate to do office jobs in an office rather than their own homes, but where their employer no longer bothers to maintain one, then the market will probably step in and provide a solution (if those persons are willing to part with some percentage of what they would once have spent on nasty sweaty cattle truck train commutes for the dubious privilege.)
    We started doing that 3 years ago. Locations in Cambridge, Mortlake, Newbury at the moment.
    A true visionary, Sir :smiley:

    I don't suppose you'd also care to disclose tomorrow night's Lotto numbers...?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    This is probably fair enough. Although in my defence I'm a good deal worse at the moment because my employer has announced a round of mass sackings, and if I'm one of the victims then God only knows how long I'll be on the scrapheap for.

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    I'm restocking my Brexit boxes slowly.
    I actually kept one of mine; it mostly contains tins and a couple of packets of pasta, but I'll have to check the use by dates on the biscuits come the Autumn as they'll probably need eating and replacing.

    If things look iffy by about October time then it may be a case of starting to refill the second one, as well as buying a couple of large packs of bog roll before all that nonsense kicks off again.
    I’m going to start making preparations for a second wave out here in Spain the numbers are not looking good although mainly driven by a couple of areas. It makes sense to do the same in the UK, this is far from over especially in areas that see large population movements. The health services are clearly more experienced in handling cases and mortality rates are falling but I’m still going to be very wary of socializing indoors even when it’s bloody hot outside (34C currently)
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    News at 10 have kindly clarified things for us:

    When Bozo said go back to work, he didn't mean 'Go back to work'.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Grim news on bbc from Arizona.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
    Realistically the pubs and restaurants have to be exempt because you can't expect the clientele to eat and drink through a bloody mask.

    This might even be part of a fiendish ploy to encourage people to patronise certain venues. I can just see the miserable bastards deciding that wouldn't it be a brilliant idea to force the population to wear the wretched things everywhere - EXCEPT in pubs, restaurants and (possibly) gyms? You thus incentivize the use of these facilities because they're the only places outside your own house where you can go without being forced to strap a bit of cloth over your face the whole time.
    Seems crazy. I went to the supermarket today and found it extremely easy to not wear a mask or gloves whilst getting my shopping and not talking to anyone/exhaling in a way that might spread any diseases I have. At the pub, after a few looseners, people completely disregard others personal space and talk very loudly at close proximity. In gyms people breathe far more heavily with their mouths wider open than they would almost anywhere else (!).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    edited July 2020

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Possibly the least surprising revelation ever.

    This paragraph from Richard Morrison sums up the Wokeists' contempt for ordinary people. Not only are they not regular Prom-goers like the great (?) man, they dare to experience feelings of patriotism that are not 'ironic':

    'I look around me - particularly at the people sitting in the posh seats whom I've never seen at any other Proms - and realise that I can detect absolutely no sign of irony as they roar out these crudely jingoistic texts. On the contrary, they seem to mean every single word...'

    Get stuffed, Richard, there's a good fellow.
    I will concede you half a point here. Too much self-conscious irony is a barrier to expression and fun. But this is nothing to do with "woke". In fact I think you should exercise some free expression of your own and break out of the mental chains which cause you to try and make anything and everything about this.
    It may be woke, or it may just be the common leftwing 'intellectual' contempt for Britain and its history - don't make me quote Orwell's 'The Lion and the Unicorn' again - but either way it's utterly contemptible and frankly disqualifies those who think like that from the government of the country.

    Yes, some people actually love this country and its traditions in an entirely unironic fashion, and that's perfectly all right and normal. People like Morrison are the fringe loons who presume in their arrogance to dictate to the mainstream.
    Yet a little bird tells me that you yourself do not tune in on Proms night and sit there in your union jack onesie belting out the tear jerking "patriotic" anthems.

    In fact do you even possess a patriotic onesie? I doubt it. In fact I'd be amazed.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    So much money getting pissed down the drain. It's the embodiment of stupidity.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
    Which vaccine are they buying though? We've already secured priority delivery of the Oxford vaccine, close to securing the Imperial vaccine as a priority as well and I'm sure the Americans will be happy to trade their efforts for ours so we each get the number two positions.

    I think the German vaccine candidate is set for phase 1 trials soon or have just started, but that puts it months behind the Oxford team and I think it's on a schedule for the middle of next year not the end of this one.

    Vaccines are one area the UK government has absolutely nailed IMO and continues to do so.
    Great if it all works, but I can't help feeling you may have put the cart before the horse here.
    The whole point is that the EU are buying the same vaccines that we have already secured priority access to. We have spent a lot of money in this area and we have a world class research sector and a world class pharmaceutical sector. This scheme would have given up our priority access purchases and put them in the hands of the EU, why would we do that?
    I hope your confidence turns out to be well founded.
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006

    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Guardian: The government is considering making masks mandatory in shops, Boris Johnson has hinted, as senior scientists urged ministers to be seen in face coverings more often to set a good example.

    And Breaking: Ghislaine Maxwell should be released on bail while awaiting trial for her alleged involvement in Jeffrey Epstein’s child sex trafficking ring because of “the Covid-19 crisis and its impact on detained defendants”, the British socialite’s lawyers argued in Manhattan federal court papers filed on Friday.

    Sensible decision to make face masks mandatory in shops as well as public transport as is now the case in Scotland to reduce the chance of a second peak
    It would have been sensible four months ago!
    Agreed but given that it wasn't done then the sensible time to have made mask-wearing in shops mandatory would have been to coincide it with the the general relaxation at the beginning of this month. I suspect Johnson will dither for a couple more weeks and finally shut the stable door when the horse has well and truly bolted.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    President Trump and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, are continuing to spar over the government’s response to the coronavirus...
    One of the points of contention is the seriousness of the disease caused by the virus, which has been spreading across the country at its fastest pace yet. Mr. Trump has argued that it is mostly harmless


    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/world/coronavirus-updates.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage#link-38f72312

    Americans would be actually suicidal to re-elect Trump for another term.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
    Realistically the pubs and restaurants have to be exempt because you can't expect the clientele to eat and drink through a bloody mask.

    This might even be part of a fiendish ploy to encourage people to patronise certain venues. I can just see the miserable bastards deciding that wouldn't it be a brilliant idea to force the population to wear the wretched things everywhere - EXCEPT in pubs, restaurants and (possibly) gyms? You thus incentivize the use of these facilities because they're the only places outside your own house where you can go without being forced to strap a bit of cloth over your face the whole time.
    Seems crazy. I went to the supermarket today and found it extremely easy to not wear a mask or gloves whilst getting my shopping and not talking to anyone/exhaling in a way that might spread any diseases I have. At the pub, after a few looseners, people completely disregard others personal space and talk very loudly at close proximity. In gyms people breathe far more heavily with their mouths wider open than they would almost anywhere else (!).
    The government is now just responding to the demands of business and turned its back on the scientific advice.

    However it appears that a big slice of the population are declining the opportunities presented to increase their risk of infection.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Christ almighty...

    https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1281696778103005188

    When America goes down, we'll be dragged even further into the mire.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,798
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Fieldwork mostly done after more Sunak cash dispensing and acres of positive headlines about it, too.

    So what.. its a double digit lead. Where is CHB when you need him, predicting crossover v soon.... (was it just for best PM or voting int as well?)

    It's MoE on the previous YouGov. The Tory leads are currently in the four to 10 point range. I'll take that right now given where things were in March, especially as there is decent progress from December (4 to 7 points, depending on the pollster).

    That may be true , but its TEN points yes 10 points. if you are happy to take that , then bless you... Starmer has had it easy as you like, the Tories have worked him out, it isn't going to be plain sailing for either party.....

    I agree. Starmer has to be more than not Jeremy Corbyn. The Tories have a depression and a potential No Deal with the EU to steer us through. Politics is going to be very interesting.
    And of course the rest of the EU face a depression and no deal to steer through

    It is not going to be pretty for any government

    It was good to see Mark Drakeford, Wales FM, resolutely defending the union today and this is consistent with Starmer's support for the union.

    Stark contrast with Sturgeon who has been trying to use Wales to attack Westminster
    Why oh why isn't the leader of the SNP resolutely defending the union? It's an absolute disgrace, so it is.
    She is on her own as far as Wales is concerned
    Perhaps because the Scots remember a time where they were not joined at the hip to England? The Welsh have had a few hundred years more to get used to the experience...
    There is no real appetite for an Independent Wales. That will change when unfortunately Scotland leave the Union.
    Wales voted Leave just like England and more English voters now want an independent England than Welsh voters want an independent Wales anyway

    https://twitter.com/dgwbirch/status/1279084991327199234?s=20

    Indyref2 will of course be banned for as long as the Tories remain in power
    If you read my first post on this subject I stated there is currently no appetite for Welsh Independence, my point was, there will be when Scotland and Northern Ireland have left

    And your Boris will ban a referendum before 2024. It will be the Labour government in 2024 that presides over the break up of the union, I believe are notions that will come back to bite you.
    There won't be, as I showed England will vote to leave the Union before Wales, so if the Union ends it will be Wales left standing for the Union to the last.

    You can think what you want, the Tories will ban indyref2 as per their 2019 manifesto up until 2024 with or without a nationalist Holyrood majority next year, if Starmer wishes to allow an indyref2 after that is up to him but I would not guarantee a Yes vote in that circumstance, especially as he would take the UK back into the single market anyway and offer devomax
    Johnson will have so ticked off Scotland by 2024 that Starmer offering 50% off dining out vouchers won't change enough minds. The answer will be yes!
    In your view because you are weak and give in to Nats, I never give in to Nats no matter what the cost.
    The Scottish people elect an endless succession of Nationalist Governments, the entire purpose of which are to break up the Union. Many, perhaps most, Nat voters also actively detest us.

    Why, therefore, are you so desperate not to let them simply go and do their own thing? What is the damned point? Stubbornness?
    Yes and they will go on hating us regardless, 45% of Scots at least are Nationalists (and the majority of Yes voting Glasgow) and many of them do hate the English, especially Tory voting English that will not change however much we try and appease them. It is the 55% who voted No in 2014 we need to focus on keeping.

    As a Unionist I respect the views of the 55% who voted to stay in the UK in a 'once in a generation' referendum in 2014, Scotland provides a great deal to the UK from oil and renewable energy, to culture, to ancient universities and financial services and whiskey and army regiments and we should do what we can to retain it.
    "Some hate the English. I don't. They're just wankers." (Trainspotting).
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    nichomar said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    It's a purchasing scheme, not manufacturing or research. It's basically a panic from the EU because there isn't a vaccine from any EU country that is entering the human trial stage so they haven't got a domestic candidate that is going to have a good chance of being in manufacturing before the end of the year. Getting us in the scheme would have given them two probably viable vaccines, one for October delivering and one for January. Right now they are left to being just another buyer of vaccines researched, developed and manufactured elsewhere. There is no need for the UK to take part in the scheme.
    Hopefully you're correct. I think I'm just in a glass half empty (well, glass pretty much drained) sort of a mood tonight.
    You're ALWAYS in a glass half empty mood. Total gloompot.
    This is probably fair enough. Although in my defence I'm a good deal worse at the moment because my employer has announced a round of mass sackings, and if I'm one of the victims then God only knows how long I'll be on the scrapheap for.

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    I'm restocking my Brexit boxes slowly.
    I actually kept one of mine; it mostly contains tins and a couple of packets of pasta, but I'll have to check the use by dates on the biscuits come the Autumn as they'll probably need eating and replacing.

    If things look iffy by about October time then it may be a case of starting to refill the second one, as well as buying a couple of large packs of bog roll before all that nonsense kicks off again.
    I’m going to start making preparations for a second wave out here in Spain the numbers are not looking good although mainly driven by a couple of areas. It makes sense to do the same in the UK, this is far from over especially in areas that see large population movements. The health services are clearly more experienced in handling cases and mortality rates are falling but I’m still going to be very wary of socializing indoors even when it’s bloody hot outside (34C currently)
    We are all guessing, of course, but I'm not at all convinced that anything resembling a second wave, if it does come, will be either as severe as the first or affect the entire country (i.e. there may be flare-ups in some areas whilst others continue to be very lightly affected.) My main concern is more to do with Brexit - I don't necessarily think that any possible disruption to trade will, in and of itself, cause widespread critical shortages either, but I do think that there's real potential for reports of a lack of specific goods (lettuces, wet wipes, whatever) being amplified through journalists desperate for a scoop and these wretched social media echo chambers into "everything's running out and we're all going to starve to death in a week," and that setting off an avalanche of panic buying. After all, it only takes a relatively small percentage of the population to begin clearing the shelves before the shortages really do begin to escalate and we're back in April again.

    It might, therefore, be understandable if one were to seek to build up some supplies, well in advance and very gradually, so as not to have to start from zero if Panic Buying Mk.2 comes to pass.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    More centralisation in Whitehall?

    Madness.

    And directly opposite to what seems to have worked so well in Germany iirc.

    Also, incidentally the same Tory government who persuaded themselves that Lansley was brilliant rather than a fool.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    President Trump and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, are continuing to spar over the government’s response to the coronavirus...
    One of the points of contention is the seriousness of the disease caused by the virus, which has been spreading across the country at its fastest pace yet. Mr. Trump has argued that it is mostly harmless


    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/world/coronavirus-updates.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage#link-38f72312

    Americans would be actually suicidal to re-elect Trump for another term.

    I am not convinced by this guys model, but he thinks Trump getting a second term is 91% certain.

    https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1281531198234386434?s=09
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    Foxy said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    No fair enough. But I'm not ashamed of those Proms scenes I just feel a bit squirmy and embarrassed to watch them. Should I be ashamed of feeling embarrassed? I don't think so. It's just how it impacts me. Why then do I tune in and expose myself to it? That's a very good question that I cannot answer to my own satisfaction let alone anybody else's.
    The last night of the proms looks like my vision of hell. Its pretty easy to avoid though.
    I am sure I am doing it a great disservice but as an outsider it looks like a gathering of elderly folk who like to patriotically waive the Union Jack and reminisce about empire, tradition and the good old days. It would be pretty churlish to stop Rule Britannia or Land of Hope and Glory at such a gathering or even criticise them for singing those.

    However starting a new tradition of singing Rule Britannia at another type of event, for arguments sake for the British Olympic teams, would be inappropriate. As ever context matters, and Last night of the proms is a place for tradition. There may come a time when enough of the people who actually go start to be uncomfortable with such songs but Id imagine thats 20-30 years down the line, not now.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    As time passes it would appear Covid-19 is a handy invisibility cloak for a number of projects that might otherwise have caused consternation.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    More centralisation in Whitehall?

    Madness.

    And directly opposite to what seems to have worked so well in Germany iirc.

    Also, incidentally the same Tory government who persuaded themselves that Lansley was brilliant rather than a fool.

    Germany doesn't have the NHS.

    72 years on, all that's changed is that the Health Secretary is only held responsible for every bedpan dropped in 85% of the UK, not all of it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Scott_xP said:
    Where is the 'Oh FFS' button when you need one?

    Another NHS reorganization? Yeh, that's exactly what they need right now. I bet there will be GPs reading that tomorrow who will head straight to their filing cabinet to dig out the retirement finances documents.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Possibly the least surprising revelation ever.

    This paragraph from Richard Morrison sums up the Wokeists' contempt for ordinary people. Not only are they not regular Prom-goers like the great (?) man, they dare to experience feelings of patriotism that are not 'ironic':

    'I look around me - particularly at the people sitting in the posh seats whom I've never seen at any other Proms - and realise that I can detect absolutely no sign of irony as they roar out these crudely jingoistic texts. On the contrary, they seem to mean every single word...'

    Get stuffed, Richard, there's a good fellow.
    My brother has 12 of those “posh seats”. He sells them for the Last Night - £15k. You’d be daft not to
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102

    President Trump and Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, are continuing to spar over the government’s response to the coronavirus...
    One of the points of contention is the seriousness of the disease caused by the virus, which has been spreading across the country at its fastest pace yet. Mr. Trump has argued that it is mostly harmless


    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/10/world/coronavirus-updates.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage#link-38f72312

    Americans would be actually suicidal to re-elect Trump for another term.

    Will there be any of them left by November ?????
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    Foxy said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    No fair enough. But I'm not ashamed of those Proms scenes I just feel a bit squirmy and embarrassed to watch them. Should I be ashamed of feeling embarrassed? I don't think so. It's just how it impacts me. Why then do I tune in and expose myself to it? That's a very good question that I cannot answer to my own satisfaction let alone anybody else's.
    The last night of the proms looks like my vision of hell. Its pretty easy to avoid though.
    I am sure I am doing it a great disservice but as an outsider it looks like a gathering of elderly folk who like to patriotically waive the Union Jack and reminisce about empire, tradition and the good old days. It would be pretty churlish to stop Rule Britannia or Land of Hope and Glory at such a gathering or even criticise them for singing those.

    However starting a new tradition of singing Rule Britannia at another type of event, for arguments sake for the British Olympic teams, would be inappropriate. As ever context matters, and Last night of the proms is a place for tradition. There may come a time when enough of the people who actually go start to be uncomfortable with such songs but Id imagine thats 20-30 years down the line, not now.
    Though now the EU flag is waved extensively.

    Britain is a big and diverse country. Big enough to accommodate both the flag waving karaoke nationalists and those that laugh at their jingoism.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    No fair enough. But I'm not ashamed of those Proms scenes I just feel a bit squirmy and embarrassed to watch them. Should I be ashamed of feeling embarrassed? I don't think so. It's just how it impacts me. Why then do I tune in and expose myself to it? That's a very good question that I cannot answer to my own satisfaction let alone anybody else's.
    The last night of the proms looks like my vision of hell. Its pretty easy to avoid though.
    I am sure I am doing it a great disservice but as an outsider it looks like a gathering of elderly folk who like to patriotically waive the Union Jack and reminisce about empire, tradition and the good old days. It would be pretty churlish to stop Rule Britannia or Land of Hope and Glory at such a gathering or even criticise them for singing those.

    However starting a new tradition of singing Rule Britannia at another type of event, for arguments sake for the British Olympic teams, would be inappropriate. As ever context matters, and Last night of the proms is a place for tradition. There may come a time when enough of the people who actually go start to be uncomfortable with such songs but Id imagine thats 20-30 years down the line, not now.
    Though now the EU flag is waved extensively.

    Britain is a big and diverse country. Big enough to accommodate both the flag waving karaoke nationalists and those that laugh at their jingoism.
    EU flag? As I said reminiscing about the glorious past!
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,604

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
    Realistically the pubs and restaurants have to be exempt because you can't expect the clientele to eat and drink through a bloody mask.

    This might even be part of a fiendish ploy to encourage people to patronise certain venues. I can just see the miserable bastards deciding that wouldn't it be a brilliant idea to force the population to wear the wretched things everywhere - EXCEPT in pubs, restaurants and (possibly) gyms? You thus incentivize the use of these facilities because they're the only places outside your own house where you can go without being forced to strap a bit of cloth over your face the whole time.
    Seems crazy. I went to the supermarket today and found it extremely easy to not wear a mask or gloves whilst getting my shopping and not talking to anyone/exhaling in a way that might spread any diseases I have. At the pub, after a few looseners, people completely disregard others personal space and talk very loudly at close proximity. In gyms people breathe far more heavily with their mouths wider open than they would almost anywhere else (!).
    The government is now just responding to the demands of business and turned its back on the scientific advice.

    However it appears that a big slice of the population are declining the opportunities presented to increase their risk of infection.
    Here is a useful graphic on risky activities published in Ireland.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    More centralisation in Whitehall?

    Madness.

    And directly opposite to what seems to have worked so well in Germany iirc.

    Also, incidentally the same Tory government who persuaded themselves that Lansley was brilliant rather than a fool.

    Germany doesn't have the NHS.

    72 years on, all that's changed is that the Health Secretary is only held responsible for every bedpan dropped in 85% of the UK, not all of it.
    I know, but they centralise a lot of decision making on many aspects of governance.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    As time passes it would appear Covid-19 is a handy invisibility cloak for a number of projects that might otherwise have caused consternation.
    Smells like a Cummings plan to me. Bet Big Data will feature in the plans.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Those who read my header six weeks would know already that centralised "Command and Control" were back in a big way.

    As time passes it would appear Covid-19 is a handy invisibility cloak for a number of projects that might otherwise have caused consternation.
    Smells like a Cummings plan to me. Bet Big Data will feature in the plans.
    Yes it does.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502

    Scott_xP said:
    Every so often one gets another reminder of what a bloody stupid idea all this is.

    Taking us backwards by 50 years.
    Yes, but we have to see the idiocy in practice before we realise our error.
    Afraid you are right.

    Next winter is going to be horrendous. Nothing like it since at least the 70s.
    I am trying to picture the absolute carnage, everywhere, from this act of vandalism.
    The government will blame the EU for having the cheek to enforce customs checks when the UK was so willing to be nice! And the easily duped which sadly seems a lot of the population will swallow it. Have you had a chance to read the EU release on what will change even if there is a trade deal . It makes grim reading ! And even worse if there’s no deal .
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Nigelb said:
    I did the like the “you have to send it to me in written writing” line... what other kind of writing did she have in mind?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    Barnesian said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Do people in pubs have to wear them too? It doesn't make sense if they don't
    Realistically the pubs and restaurants have to be exempt because you can't expect the clientele to eat and drink through a bloody mask.

    This might even be part of a fiendish ploy to encourage people to patronise certain venues. I can just see the miserable bastards deciding that wouldn't it be a brilliant idea to force the population to wear the wretched things everywhere - EXCEPT in pubs, restaurants and (possibly) gyms? You thus incentivize the use of these facilities because they're the only places outside your own house where you can go without being forced to strap a bit of cloth over your face the whole time.
    Seems crazy. I went to the supermarket today and found it extremely easy to not wear a mask or gloves whilst getting my shopping and not talking to anyone/exhaling in a way that might spread any diseases I have. At the pub, after a few looseners, people completely disregard others personal space and talk very loudly at close proximity. In gyms people breathe far more heavily with their mouths wider open than they would almost anywhere else (!).
    The government is now just responding to the demands of business and turned its back on the scientific advice.

    However it appears that a big slice of the population are declining the opportunities presented to increase their risk of infection.
    Here is a useful graphic on risky activities published in Ireland.

    A bit of moralising in there. Low risk vacation in shared home with another family. High risk, go out with someone you dont know well.

    Really not sure the virus cares who you know. Someone new may be riskier or less risky than an existing partner depending entirely on their other actions, not how long you have known them.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    edited July 2020
    IshmaelZ said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kyf_100 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I've never been a fan of these songs so wouldn't be bothered personally.

    "BBC Music magazine columnist calls for 'crudely jingoistic' songs Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory to be scrapped from Last Night of the Proms because they are 'insensitive' in wake of BLM movement"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8509685/Calls-Rule-Britannia-banned-Night-Proms.html

    I've been calling for this for years. Nothing to do with BLM.
    Why is our culture and our history something to be ashamed of?
    I'm not ashamed of all our history and culture by any means. That Proms stuff I just find a bit embarrassing. I think because it's both tacky AND jingoistic. Maybe the latter is my main problem with it because tacky can ok. I didn't mind Cliff singing at Wimbledon for example. That actually gets better with time. It's aged well.
    Then nobody is forcing you to sing.

    I find people singing eng-er-land at football matches a bit tacky and embarrassing, but I understand the people in the stadium at the world cup see it quite differently.It's about being part of a shared history and shared tradition. A sing song. A knees up.

    Rule, Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory are, to me, charming if occasionally antiquated parts of our history (does anybody believe that Britannia rules the waves any more? We can barely defend the Falklands). They are not parts of our national psyche to be ashamed of.
    As others have noted, it's an instruction - Britannia rule the waves - not a statement.

    What does seem a bit rich is claiming that Britons never shall be slaves in 1745, the absolute peak of the UK slave trade. The song should continue "but all other nationalities are up for grabs."
    Mildly noteworthy that these children of The Enlightenment were well aware that to be a slave was a very bad thing and to be avoided. One wonders what mental accommodations were made to justify doing it to other people(s).
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MaxPB said:

    DjayM said:

    There’s also the apparent gamble of keeping the UK out of the EU vaccine programme.............

    Who, in their right mind(*) would want to get involved in an EU vaccine programme

    (*) Apart from LibDems, Obvs

    You do realise that Sod's Law dictates that the EU programme will now be the one that hits the jackpot, don't you?
    I don't think it's about hitting the jackpot is it? I think it's about joint procurement once the jackpot has been hit.
    Most likely what this would mean is that everybody outside of this scheme (including us) would discover that they couldn't get hold of a single dose of the wretched thing until the very last goat herder in the most remote corner of Bulgaria had been immunised first.
    Which vaccine are they buying though? We've already secured priority delivery of the Oxford vaccine, close to securing the Imperial vaccine as a priority as well and I'm sure the Americans will be happy to trade their efforts for ours so we each get the number two positions.

    I think the German vaccine candidate is set for phase 1 trials soon or have just started, but that puts it months behind the Oxford team and I think it's on a schedule for the middle of next year not the end of this one.

    Vaccines are one area the UK government has absolutely nailed IMO and continues to do so.
    Watch this space
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149
    edited July 2020

    Scott_xP said:
    Where is the 'Oh FFS' button when you need one?

    Another NHS reorganization? Yeh, that's exactly what they need right now. I bet there will be GPs reading that tomorrow who will head straight to their filing cabinet to dig out the retirement finances documents.
    There is always room for improvement, often a great deal of it. But 95 times out of 100 reorganisation is just shuffling cards around. I won't hold my breath on this one.
This discussion has been closed.