On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
Yeah this is the problem Labour has. If we tell them to just fuck off and vote Tory, don't be surprised when they do.
We really need to get over this "voters are evil, the media corrupts them" crap. Start winning elections again by figuring out what people want.
Yes. I think we're all a little guilty at times of treating 'the public' like fools compared to us know it all political wonks, and it is not as though there is no impact from how things are reported or what others say, but it is very easy to slip into a very insulting attitude. If nothing else, sometimes voters make the 'right' choice, so clearly it is not inevitable they be 'fooled' or 'corrupted', so the question remains regardless 'why did you fail to convince them this time?'
Johnson's popularity is plummeting partly because many tory voters are very unhappy with him.
Among the complaints are the government's weak and tepid response to the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter the organisation and the culture wars in general.
There are also big concerns about the dire economic situation and the huge dose of socialism that has been used to counter COVID.
I think this is filtering through to MPs, who may make their unhappiness felt through opposition to Johnson's proposed EU settlement. This is being seen by some as another Johnson dogs breakfast.
THis is going to be a horrible autumn for Johnson, one he may well not survive.
I am going to be fascinated to see what happens with Brexit. I remain unconvinced he can bring something back that will keep all his voters happy.
In 2019 he managed - again - to sell Brexit as an abstract concept and that's how he got all the Brexit voters on his side. We've seen through polling time and time again, when Brexit is defined, its support drops off massively. He's going to have to define it now - and that will be all on him.
I don’t think that many people really care. One you get a free trade deal the issue will subside from public view
But then what does Johnson have? Beyond Brexit is where to me it seems painfully obvious he doesn't have a clue what to do.
Gove and Cummings do though.
The thing that might save Johnson is that he knows his enormous weaknesses and is happy to let others do the policy.
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Data-driven decisions are better than "plucked out of thin air decisions".
But also always worth remembering that "lies, damned lies and statistics" is just as applicable to data science as it is to, well, statistics.
This actually speaks to an interesting cultural divide.
My father deeply was involved, over many years, in the evolution of modern medical ethics. Particularly in the efforts to quantify and provide a consistent moral framework for decisions.
An early memory is the horror with which such an undertaking was considered by people from some educational backgrounds. To replace "feelings" with "facts" in such matters was evil!
On one occasion, a visitor to our home tried to prove his point by posing a what was, in fact, a simple and long standing example of a moral conundrum. Went back to the Greeks...
Being aged about 12, I piped up and answered him. It was nothing clever - if you'd read the example in a book complete with the answers by various philosophers....
Johnson's popularity is plummeting partly because many tory voters are very unhappy with him.
Among the complaints are the government's weak and tepid response to the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter the organisation and the culture wars in general.
There are also big concerns about the dire economic situation and the huge dose of socialism that has been used to counter COVID.
I think this is filtering through to MPs, who may make their unhappiness felt through opposition to Johnson's proposed EU settlement. This is being seen by some as another Johnson dogs breakfast.
THis is going to be a horrible autumn for Johnson, one he may well not survive.
I am going to be fascinated to see what happens with Brexit. I remain unconvinced he can bring something back that will keep all his voters happy.
In 2019 he managed - again - to sell Brexit as an abstract concept and that's how he got all the Brexit voters on his side. We've seen through polling time and time again, when Brexit is defined, its support drops off massively. He's going to have to define it now - and that will be all on him.
I don’t think that many people really care. One you get a free trade deal the issue will subside from public view
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
You can recruit all the 'actual' you want but if they are managed by a control freak with a specific world view who demands totally loyalty, zero dissent and enforced group think then you aren't going to get decent answers.
The one campaign where we know he used data scientists he unexpectedly won.
That does suggest he works well with them or has an ability to spot patterns no one else sees. I suspect the former
Unexpectedly won? The side that regularly polled ahead over the previous decade. That posted regular poll leads during the campaign period. That had the majority of the press on its side?
That one?
Unexpectedly?
The one where bettors made a lot of money by betting against the political consensus. Yep.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing my friend
It's not hindsight to observe that most of the polling in the lead up to referendum day indicated that Leave would win.
And yet, somehow, it came as a shock to the political and media classes.
Expectations are not necessarily aligned with facts.
And it is *precisely* hindsight to say “oh but it was obvious” and pick out the data that proves it
IIRC correctly, it was a small Leave advantage, which could have easily be overturned by differential turnout. Or indeed, could have been within the margin of error.
Johnson's popularity is plummeting partly because many tory voters are very unhappy with him.
Among the complaints are the government's weak and tepid response to the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter the organisation and the culture wars in general.
There are also big concerns about the dire economic situation and the huge dose of socialism that has been used to counter COVID.
I think this is filtering through to MPs, who may make their unhappiness felt through opposition to Johnson's proposed EU settlement. This is being seen by some as another Johnson dogs breakfast.
THis is going to be a horrible autumn for Johnson, one he may well not survive.
I am going to be fascinated to see what happens with Brexit. I remain unconvinced he can bring something back that will keep all his voters happy.
In 2019 he managed - again - to sell Brexit as an abstract concept and that's how he got all the Brexit voters on his side. We've seen through polling time and time again, when Brexit is defined, its support drops off massively. He's going to have to define it now - and that will be all on him.
I don’t think that many people really care. One you get a free trade deal the issue will subside from public view
But then what does Johnson have? Beyond Brexit is where to me it seems painfully obvious he doesn't have a clue what to do.
Gove and Cummings do though.
The thing that might save Johnson is that he knows his enormous weaknesses and is happy to let others do the policy.
Oh God, they can fuck up the country just like they fucked up education
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
You can recruit all the 'actual' you want but if they are managed by a control freak with a specific world view who demands totally loyalty, zero dissent and enforced group think then you aren't going to get decent answers.
The one campaign where we know he used data scientists he unexpectedly won.
That does suggest he works well with them or has an ability to spot patterns no one else sees. I suspect the former
Unexpectedly won? The side that regularly polled ahead over the previous decade. That posted regular poll leads during the campaign period. That had the majority of the press on its side?
That one?
Unexpectedly?
The one where bettors made a lot of money by betting against the political consensus. Yep.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing my friend
It's not hindsight to observe that most of the polling in the lead up to referendum day indicated that Leave would win.
And yet, somehow, it came as a shock to the political and media classes.
Expectations are not necessarily aligned with facts.
And it is *precisely* hindsight to say “oh but it was obvious” and pick out the data that proves it
It was obvious. That the political and media class missed it is not a huge surprise. The privileged elites that control this country are not exactly tuned in. They seem to be missing what is going on in Scotland currently, too.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
Your point is , yes men are yes men , there will be no allowance for real opinions , it will be fixed to meet the result required.
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Ditto United States of America, cases and deaths basically zero.
I put this on a thread yesterday, from the NHS England Hospital data, long before it turned up on Twitter. It is almost certainly a reporting artefact, but interesting
for context, the following is the whole data series -
The breathless US media reporting notwithstanding, the graphs I have read show that US daily reported deaths from Corona peaked in early May at 2,700 or so.
On July 11 they were at 729.
Which is both a week on week and a month on month rise. Uncanny.
You are now as quarter as likely to die after hospitalisation than you were back at the start due to improved treatment.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
Yeah this is the problem Labour has. If we tell them to just fuck off and vote Tory, don't be surprised when they do.
We really need to get over this "voters are evil, the media corrupts them" crap. Start winning elections again by figuring out what people want.
The last time that happened was in 1997. The left can barely say his name. Blaming the voters is the easy option. We read it on here day after day after day...
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths in England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
Depends if you want to keep it at zero or see it surge back up.
If the choice is another lockdown and financial restrictions in the future or getting back to normal with a cloth mask, then does that change things?
Just looked at the PL table. Liverpool struggling now to reach 100 points. And Man City have a MUCH better goal difference. Casts the season in a whole new light.
The Liverpool fans are going to be totally distraught at a couple of off results, having wrapped up the title with seven games to spare and with 30 wins so far this season.
Alternatively they were the slowest team to win the top flight ever!
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
One would expect an experienced barrister to try to understand why and how members of the public make choices. Encouraging them to look dispassionately at the evidence and reach the barristers preferred conclusion is, surely, a criminal barristers function
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Ditto United States of America, cases and deaths basically zero.
I put this on a thread yesterday, from the NHS England Hospital data, long before it turned up on Twitter. It is almost certainly a reporting artefact, but interesting
for context, the following is the whole data series -
The breathless US media reporting notwithstanding, the graphs I have read show that US daily reported deaths from Corona peaked in early May at 2,700 or so.
On July 11 they were at 729.
It takes time for the stupidity to build. Short of a medical treatment that reduces COVID19 to the lethality of a normal flu, a large number of people are going to die.
Given the lies over reporting - actual political pressure to suppress diagnosis and death numbers - in the US, the situation is probably far worse than the raw numbers suggest.
When you add in the financial pressure - going to hospital to be treated for COVID can leave you with a 7 figure bill in the US - the outlook is horrifying.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
QED - you know best. It's a puzzle why no-one else can see it.
Starmer/Labour seems to be trying its very best to currently not commit to anything - and right now polling wise for Starmer that's working but of course Labour is still way behind.
So at some point Starmer is going to have to tell us what he thinks. But perhaps that view is going to upset a lot of people in the Labour Party, hence why he is staying quiet for now
GUARDIAN: Britons are prepared to pay higher taxes to turn the country into a kinder, more equal and supportive place to live after the coronavirus pandemic is over, according to new research set to be published this week. A poll carried out for the strategy consultancy BritainThinks reveals that just 12% of people want life to return to normal “exactly as it was before” once the pandemic is over.
The research shows three clear priorities are emerging: better funding for the NHS, better treatment and pay for essential workers, and an economic recovery that doesn’t just focus on London. There is also an appetite for a kinder society that prioritises better support for people struggling with mental or physical health problems, allows workers more time off with family and friends, cares about the environment and ensures high levels of employment.
The assumption that paying higher taxes is going to accomplish all those things, particularly in the aftermath of an extremely deep recession, is somewhat.... optimistic.
These surveys are meaningless.
Do you want to pay key workers more? Do you want an economic recovery for everyone? Do you want workers to have more time off? Do you like motherhood? How about apple pie?
No one can answer in the negative without looking like a complete heel
Quite so. Though I'm actually not a fan of apple pie.
Also surprised at the use of wrestling lingo (unless heel also comes from other areas)
According the the Cambridge English dictionary (I know) it is old-fashioned & informal...
Much like Professional Wrestling.
I grew up in the era of Big Daddy
Giant Haystack , Mick McManus and Billy Two Rivers fond memories
Starmer/Labour seems to be trying its very best to currently not commit to anything - and right now polling wise for Starmer that's working but of course Labour is still way behind.
So at some point Starmer is going to have to tell us what he thinks. But perhaps that view is going to upset a lot of people in the Labour Party, hence why he is staying quiet for now
Yup - his choice is to annoy the voters or the party. Blair or Corbyn.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
One would expect an experienced barrister to try to understand why and how members of the public make choices. Encouraging them to look dispassionately at the evidence and reach the barristers preferred conclusion is, surely, a criminal barristers function
I think he knows what he needs to do and personally has the ability to do it. Carrying his party with him will, of course, be trickier.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
One would expect an experienced barrister to try to understand why and how members of the public make choices. Encouraging them to look dispassionately at the evidence and reach the barristers preferred conclusion is, surely, a criminal barristers function
I think he knows what he needs to do and personally has the ability to do it. Carrying his party with him will, of course, be trickier.
He's definitely the most able leader Labour has had in some time and it's nice to be able to look at polling and confirm that view.
Unfortunately Labour itself is still in somewhat of a hole.
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
Johnson's popularity is plummeting partly because many tory voters are very unhappy with him.
Among the complaints are the government's weak and tepid response to the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter the organisation and the culture wars in general.
There are also big concerns about the dire economic situation and the huge dose of socialism that has been used to counter COVID.
I think this is filtering through to MPs, who may make their unhappiness felt through opposition to Johnson's proposed EU settlement. This is being seen by some as another Johnson dogs breakfast.
THis is going to be a horrible autumn for Johnson, one he may well not survive.
I am going to be fascinated to see what happens with Brexit. I remain unconvinced he can bring something back that will keep all his voters happy.
In 2019 he managed - again - to sell Brexit as an abstract concept and that's how he got all the Brexit voters on his side. We've seen through polling time and time again, when Brexit is defined, its support drops off massively. He's going to have to define it now - and that will be all on him.
I don’t think that many people really care. One you get a free trade deal the issue will subside from public view
True, but there's quite a big assumption there.
There’s a deal to be done, they are just haggling about the details. A bit like George Bernard Shaw abd the society beauty
Dominic Cummings is recruiting a new team of crack data scientists who will soon prove the silent (because unpolled) majority supports Boris. This is, after all, how Brexit was won.
Oh no, imagine the horror of governments making decisions based on data and science.
Much better to just ask all the PPE and liberal arts graduates how they *feel* about any given subject.
Cummings knows nothing about science. He uses pseudo scientific cliches to dress up his opinions and justify his ideological schemes.
They’re recruiting actual scientists.
You can recruit all the 'actual' you want but if they are managed by a control freak with a specific world view who demands totally loyalty, zero dissent and enforced group think then you aren't going to get decent answers.
The one campaign where we know he used data scientists he unexpectedly won.
That does suggest he works well with them or has an ability to spot patterns no one else sees. I suspect the former
Unexpectedly won? The side that regularly polled ahead over the previous decade. That posted regular poll leads during the campaign period. That had the majority of the press on its side?
That one?
Unexpectedly?
The one where bettors made a lot of money by betting against the political consensus. Yep.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing my friend
It's not hindsight to observe that most of the polling in the lead up to referendum day indicated that Leave would win.
And yet, somehow, it came as a shock to the political and media classes.
Expectations are not necessarily aligned with facts.
And it is *precisely* hindsight to say “oh but it was obvious” and pick out the data that proves it
It was obvious. That the political and media class missed it is not a huge surprise. The privileged elites that control this country are not exactly tuned in. They seem to be missing what is going on in Scotland currently, too.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
I agree. I`ve always been less critical than some of the false consciousness thing
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Ditto United States of America, cases and deaths basically zero.
I put this on a thread yesterday, from the NHS England Hospital data, long before it turned up on Twitter. It is almost certainly a reporting artefact, but interesting
for context, the following is the whole data series -
The breathless US media reporting notwithstanding, the graphs I have read show that US daily reported deaths from Corona peaked in early May at 2,700 or so.
On July 11 they were at 729.
Which is both a week on week and a month on month rise. Uncanny.
You are now as quarter as likely to die after hospitalisation than you were back at the start due to improved treatment.
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
One would expect an experienced barrister to try to understand why and how members of the public make choices. Encouraging them to look dispassionately at the evidence and reach the barristers preferred conclusion is, surely, a criminal barristers function
The issue for Starmer is that while Labour is up 6% from 32% to 38% on GE19 all that has mainly come from the LDs who are down from 11% to 6%. The Tories are virtually unchanged on 42%, down just 1%, so he is still winning few Tory voters https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1282036573756895235?s=20
Johnson's popularity is plummeting partly because many tory voters are very unhappy with him.
Among the complaints are the government's weak and tepid response to the communists and anarchists of Black Lives Matter the organisation and the culture wars in general.
There are also big concerns about the dire economic situation and the huge dose of socialism that has been used to counter COVID.
I think this is filtering through to MPs, who may make their unhappiness felt through opposition to Johnson's proposed EU settlement. This is being seen by some as another Johnson dogs breakfast.
THis is going to be a horrible autumn for Johnson, one he may well not survive.
I am going to be fascinated to see what happens with Brexit. I remain unconvinced he can bring something back that will keep all his voters happy.
In 2019 he managed - again - to sell Brexit as an abstract concept and that's how he got all the Brexit voters on his side. We've seen through polling time and time again, when Brexit is defined, its support drops off massively. He's going to have to define it now - and that will be all on him.
I don’t think that many people really care. One you get a free trade deal the issue will subside from public view
True, but there's quite a big assumption there.
There’s a deal to be done, they are just haggling about the details. A bit like George Bernard Shaw abd the society beauty
While I suspect you know quite a bit more about how things are going than I do, I wish other evidence was as convincing.
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
My point was I don't think it can be meaningfully rectified. If it wasn't in place at the start I don't think compliance would be effective.
The header survey clearly points to the fact that the public do not like/trust the likely decision makers currently in labour . Not surprised given the naked support to far left BLM protests etc
Only way to explain Starmer being popular but the party lagging in the polls .
The Red Wall seats do not vote for student politics
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
My point was I don't think it can be meaningfully rectified. If it wasn't in place at the start I don't think compliance would be effective.
I know that was your point - but an attempt should still be made.
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Ditto United States of America, cases and deaths basically zero.
I put this on a thread yesterday, from the NHS England Hospital data, long before it turned up on Twitter. It is almost certainly a reporting artefact, but interesting
for context, the following is the whole data series -
The breathless US media reporting notwithstanding, the graphs I have read show that US daily reported deaths from Corona peaked in early May at 2,700 or so.
On July 11 they were at 729.
Which is both a week on week and a month on month rise. Uncanny.
You are now as quarter as likely to die after hospitalisation than you were back at the start due to improved treatment.
Or is it due to patient mix?
I believe that is controlled for co-morbidity factors
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
Very useful, thanks! Summary as I understand it (including the R number graph kindly provided yesterday here) is that incidence is at a low level and still drifting slowly downwards in most areas, though the R number is close enough to 1 to make careful behaviour advisable.
The issue for Starmer is that while Labour is up 6% from 32% to 38% on GE19 all that has mainly come from the LDs who are down from 11% to 6%. The Tories are virtually unchanged on 42%, down just 1%, so he is still winning few Tory voters https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1282036573756895235?s=20
Jesus Leftie Twitter is a dumpster fire.
"HAHAHA IF CORBYN WAS HERE WE'D BE 20 POINTS AHEAD"
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
My point was I don't think it can be meaningfully rectified. If it wasn't in place at the start I don't think compliance would be effective.
I know that was your point - but an attempt should still be made.
/unfortunately the only way out is herd immunity - Its why London is now getting few cases (not because they are more rigid in wearing masks or social distancing -probably the opposite) - Absolutely no point in wearing masks for their questionable effectiveness (sure if used 100% correctly they may help but people touch them all the time) .
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
Very useful, thanks! Summary as I understand it (including the R number graph kindly provided yesterday here) is that incidence is at a low level and still drifting slowly downwards in most areas, though the R number is close enough to 1 to make careful behaviour advisable.
At low levels R numbers can be misleading.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
My point was I don't think it can be meaningfully rectified. If it wasn't in place at the start I don't think compliance would be effective.
I know that was your point - but an attempt should still be made.
/unfortunately the only way out is herd immunity - Its why London is now getting few cases (not because they are more rigid in wearing masks or social distancing -probably the opposite) - Absolutely no point in wearing masks for their questionable effectiveness (sure if used 100% correctly they may help but people touch them all the time) .
A major reason for London dropping so quickly, is probably, moving to home working/furlough. Millions of people stopped meeting people - even those breaking the rules tend to meet on a small circle of acquaintances.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
QED - you know best. It's a puzzle why no-one else can see it.
It's not that. I see a dumbing down of politics here and I don't welcome it. Most things are better now than they used to be but this imo is a glaring exception. I recognize the danger of rose tinted glasses but when I dig out samples of debates from yesteryear they really are a cut above the absolute dross we get these days. Johnson & Co are a new low but it's been a trend for quite some time tbf.
To be fair to Starmer , his first 100 days have been in national trying circumstances to say the least . Also never been a fan of this 100 day thing (its crept into the corporate world as well with executives assessed on their first 100 days). Its a bit wanky and American.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
Very useful, thanks! Summary as I understand it (including the R number graph kindly provided yesterday here) is that incidence is at a low level and still drifting slowly downwards in most areas, though the R number is close enough to 1 to make careful behaviour advisable.
At low levels R numbers can be misleading.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Thanks for these.
I feel rather happier that the increase was mostly a single big outbreak in Herefordshire rather than a more general increase.
I feel like it's too late for such a decision. Having told people that the measures in place for reopening were sufficient if people were careful, I don't think people would now comply if additional measures were placed on top of that.
You're correct in that it has been done too late - and that can only be the Government's fault - but an attempt to rectify that is sensible.
My point was I don't think it can be meaningfully rectified. If it wasn't in place at the start I don't think compliance would be effective.
I know that was your point - but an attempt should still be made.
/unfortunately the only way out is herd immunity - Its why London is now getting few cases (not because they are more rigid in wearing masks or social distancing -probably the opposite) - Absolutely no point in wearing masks for their questionable effectiveness (sure if used 100% correctly they may help but people touch them all the time) .
A major reason for London dropping so quickly, is probably, moving to home working/furlough. Millions of people stopped meeting people - even those breaking the rules tend to meet on a small circle of acquaintances.
And there’s very little the government can do to encourage millions of people to spend hours of their day crammed in like sardines, as they all travel all at the same time to some of the world’s most expensive real estate. Working practices have been changed permanently by the events of this year.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
I agree. I`ve always been less critical than some of the false consciousness thing
Yes it's truly not sour grapes. If Labour won on a facile slogan and frothy populism and then governed through a mixture of disinformation and puerile soundbites I would be none too happy.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
Very useful, thanks! Summary as I understand it (including the R number graph kindly provided yesterday here) is that incidence is at a low level and still drifting slowly downwards in most areas, though the R number is close enough to 1 to make careful behaviour advisable.
At low levels R numbers can be misleading.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Thanks for these.
I feel rather happier that the increase was mostly a single big outbreak in Herefordshire rather than a more general increase.
The habit of the media stopping looking down into the data, for fear of "fucking a story"*, is a constant. At least in the modern era.
*At CNN, they literally called disproving a story with facts, thus.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
Very useful, thanks! Summary as I understand it (including the R number graph kindly provided yesterday here) is that incidence is at a low level and still drifting slowly downwards in most areas, though the R number is close enough to 1 to make careful behaviour advisable.
At low levels R numbers can be misleading.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Thanks for these.
I feel rather happier that the increase was mostly a single big outbreak in Herefordshire rather than a more general increase.
The habit of the media stopping looking down into the data, for fear of "fucking a story"*, is a constant. At least in the modern era.
*At CNN, they literally called disproving a story with facts, thus.
A prime example being the '36 areas to be into a second lockdown within a few days' bollox we had 10 days ago.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
Seems like a very localised outbreak, similar to those seen both in other parts of the UK and elsewhere
Hope somebody sensible and numerate is making decisions based on these so called hotspots as areas could be in danger of being locked down merely for testing better than other areas
Labour actually does better in current Tory seats than former Labour ones
I sense this could be a problem. Having "got Brexit done" will the RedWallers come back to a Corbyn free, moderate Labour? I'd like to think so but I'm not sure. For 2 reasons. (1) A switch like that is a big investment and human nature is to want your choices validated. (2) I think Johnson is a positive attraction for many of them.
Labour actually does better in current Tory seats than former Labour ones
I think the public is correct on this one - if we were catapulted into Government tomorrow we'd manage, but with difficulty. The whole strategy is based om gradual step by step preparation for the next 3 years.
That said, I don't think the Conservatives have the air of being ready for Government either - the sense that they're winging it from week to week with no coherent plan (yes, you too Sunak) is very strong.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
Seems like a very localised outbreak, similar to those seen both in other parts of the UK and elsewhere
Hope somebody sensible and numerate is making decisions based on these so called hotspots as areas could be in danger of being locked down merely for testing better than other areas
There are quite a few open discussions of exactly that.
Hence the upset from some "health professionals" about Pillar 2 testing - they see it as disturbing their nice, orderly way of doing things.
The outbreak experts, who have dealt with epidemics have a contrasting view - get all the data. Find the edges of the outbreak. Keep testing until you are finding lots of people who are negative.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
Seems like a very localised outbreak, similar to those seen both in other parts of the UK and elsewhere
Hope somebody sensible and numerate is making decisions based on these so called hotspots as areas could be in danger of being locked down merely for testing better than other areas
That's why they tried to find a hotspot in Leicester.
When they couldn't they realised the infections were happening on a wide spread and so a general lockdown was used.
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
So why would "tougher measures" be needed?
Following the not science in Cummings head...
Don't ask me - whoever thought of compulsory masks in shops alongside bribes to go to pubs was someone trying to be too clever by half and being only half as clever as they think they are.
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
The issue for Starmer is that while Labour is up 6% from 32% to 38% on GE19 all that has mainly come from the LDs who are down from 11% to 6%. The Tories are virtually unchanged on 42%, down just 1%, so he is still winning few Tory voters https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1282036573756895235?s=20
Jesus Leftie Twitter is a dumpster fire.
"HAHAHA IF CORBYN WAS HERE WE'D BE 20 POINTS AHEAD"
No more than blairite twitter ‘we’d be twenty points ahead of we had a credible leader’
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
Wearing masks should encourage people to come out feeling safer in a society that has taken collective responsibility for containing the virus. They should become routine wear through autumn and winter to help reduce flu spread. As an aside who controls the reaction to an outbreak in the UK. Can a LA introduce its own lockdown and impose its own rules or does it all have to come from central government?
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
I would say the opposite. I am more likely to leave my home if I know that the people I meet will be wearing masks.
And surely this is even more the case for the most vulnerable, who have been the ones disproportionately stuck at home to date.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
Labour actually does better in current Tory seats than former Labour ones
Yes, the new Tories in the former red wall seats and for the Tories plenty more to go at that they could have taken had it not been for farage and his vanity project standing candidates against them. Indeed these are the new Tories now.
It is undeniable that most everything has changed with covid creating a world of fear and change that nobody could have predicted
It is clear that Boris and Cummings are intent on changing the cosy civil service and upturn the liberal elite. The changes coming are going to upset establishment as departments and even the HOL are sent to the red wall seats, and post brexit free ports popping up across the country annoying the EU and our own remainers with accusations of our own Singapore on Thames
It will be a chaotic for a few years, no less so than in politics, but in 4 years time who knows what the political landscape will be
Polls just do not matter at present and while Starmer has made a good start there is no prospect of an election on the horizon, and by the time it arrives I expect Boris and Cummings will have left the scene, for bettter or worse
Of course most on here expect, indeed some hope, it will be worse but it could just be much better, only time will tell
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
I would say the opposite. I am more likely to leave my home if I know that the people I meet will be wearing masks.
And surely this is even more the case for the most vulnerable, who have been the ones disproportionately stuck at home to date.
Different people have different reactions.
And its my experience that people are more likely to think things are getting worse and that change is dangerous.
So what happens if people hear that they now need to wear a mask to go to Asda when previously they didn't ?
Many will think risks are increasing, that shops are unsafe and anywhere outside their home is now generally dangerous.
And those people will not eave their homes withe the consequent negative economic, social and health effects.
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Independent of lockdown. Just as the esteemed Doctor Gupta and the Oxford team predicted.
Here's a chart modified to be compatible with yours and Gupta's one-in-ten-thousand IFR theory.
Looks like you're right. If you add a sharpie at the right point and erase the stuff afterwards, the lockdown was completely unnecessary. As long as we use this chart, anyway.
It's a bit messy, but I'm sure there are denialists out there who can make it better for you.
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
I would say the opposite. I am more likely to leave my home if I know that the people I meet will be wearing masks.
And surely this is even more the case for the most vulnerable, who have been the ones disproportionately stuck at home to date.
Different people have different reactions.
And its my experience that people are more likely to think things are getting worse and that change is dangerous.
So what happens if people hear that they now need to wear a mask to go to Asda when previously they didn't ?
Many will think risks are increasing, that shops are unsafe and anywhere outside their home is now generally dangerous.
And those people will not eave their homes withe the consequent negative economic, social and health effects.
But that's what I mean, gradually build the proportion over the next couple of months. Recognise that wearing masks is a good thing but avoid mandatory generally, if possible. More carrot, less stick.
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
Any idea what's up with Herefordshire -- basically nothing and then 56 cases on the 9th? Data error, or something real?
My best guess is that something about 1 or 2 cases in Pillar 1 testing sparked the interest of the outbreak surveillance teams and they went in with a large number of Pillar 2 tests.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
It is being pointed out on twitter that the number of COVID deaths reported for England on July 10 according to official figures was.....zero.
Which only goes to illustrate what a pile of utterly specious b*llocks that Tram cartoon posted down thread is.
For these speculative what ifs it is a shame we don't have an example of a country where sections of that country reopened in a manner the so called experts deemed "too early" and "utterly recklessly" to compare against.
Because if their cases were now surging uncontrollably and deaths starting to tick up with hospitals at capacity despite the huge strides made in treatments since the start of the epidemic then this contrarian bollocks would look really fucking stupid.
Of course, no such near perfect counter example exists so we are left in the land of what ifs.
That has already happened. Many 'experts' said that the measures Johnson did take to re-open the economy were 'too early' . Second spike predictions have been going on since the very beginning of restriction easing.
Meanwhile, weeks later, deaths from COVID are now close to zero.
Independent of lockdown. Just as the esteemed Doctor Gupta and the Oxford team predicted.
Here's a chart modified to be compatible with yours and Gupta's one-in-ten-thousand IFR theory.
Looks like you're right. If you add a sharpie at the right point and erase the stuff afterwards, the lockdown was completely unnecessary. As long as we use this chart, anyway.
It's a bit messy, but I'm sure there are denialists out there who can make it better for you.
GUARDIAN: Britons are prepared to pay higher taxes to turn the country into a kinder, more equal and supportive place to live after the coronavirus pandemic is over, according to new research set to be published this week. A poll carried out for the strategy consultancy BritainThinks reveals that just 12% of people want life to return to normal “exactly as it was before” once the pandemic is over.
The research shows three clear priorities are emerging: better funding for the NHS, better treatment and pay for essential workers, and an economic recovery that doesn’t just focus on London. There is also an appetite for a kinder society that prioritises better support for people struggling with mental or physical health problems, allows workers more time off with family and friends, cares about the environment and ensures high levels of employment.
The assumption that paying higher taxes is going to accomplish all those things, particularly in the aftermath of an extremely deep recession, is somewhat.... optimistic.
These surveys are meaningless.
Do you want to pay key workers more? Do you want an economic recovery for everyone? Do you want workers to have more time off? Do you like motherhood? How about apple pie?
No one can answer in the negative without looking like a complete heel
Quite so. Though I'm actually not a fan of apple pie.
Also surprised at the use of wrestling lingo (unless heel also comes from other areas)
According the the Cambridge English dictionary (I know) it is old-fashioned & informal...
Much like Professional Wrestling.
I grew up in the era of Big Daddy
Giant Haystack , Mick McManus and Billy Two Rivers fond memories
My stepgran was a big McManus fan. Very into the wrestling generally but especially him.
BTW do the people who want compulsory mask wearing in shops wear masks themselves when away from their homes ?
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
Don't follow your 'logic'. I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops. They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside. Why suspect others of being hypocrites? 'Projection'?
Given that new infections have been falling for three months with the shops opened the science shows that masks in shops are unnecessary.
So they are following science.
They are necessary - for the autumn, which will soon be upon us.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
They may be necessary in the autumn and they may not be.
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
I would say the opposite. I am more likely to leave my home if I know that the people I meet will be wearing masks.
And surely this is even more the case for the most vulnerable, who have been the ones disproportionately stuck at home to date.
Different people have different reactions.
And its my experience that people are more likely to think things are getting worse and that change is dangerous.
So what happens if people hear that they now need to wear a mask to go to Asda when previously they didn't ?
Many will think risks are increasing, that shops are unsafe and anywhere outside their home is now generally dangerous.
And those people will not eave their homes withe the consequent negative economic, social and health effects.
But that's what I mean, gradually build the proportion over the next couple of months. Recognise that wearing masks is a good thing but avoid mandatory generally, if possible. More carrot, less stick.
Giving people a 1% discount for wearing a mask would probably work.
But the simultaneous ideas of making mask wearing compulsory in low risk shops while providing financial incentives to go to non mask wearing higher risk pubs and restaurants is imbecilic.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
I think it has always been like this. I've observed it for many years though vox pop have become more popular in recent years. I always tune out for vox pop. They irritate me so much. Yet very occasionally you get a pearl of wisdom.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
Who says we should shrug our shoulders and say 'that's how it is'? Of course the dumbing of politics should be reversed. Nor did I say you were petulant, I said 'many others' were doing that by indulging in petulant whinging, which they absolutely are. But you were not expressing fervent or idealist hope about addressing it either, since your comment was 'they need to grow up', which is hardly taking a serious approach to the problem, as it displays no care to think about why people are attracted to dumbed down politics as you put it.
We should all hope politics is not dumbed down anymore than is necessary for we the public to actually understand significant issues, since we can hardly all be experts in everything, and it will be a long and not easy fight to do it. But I seriously doubt most people care to address the issue, since they respond to the dumbing down by dumbing things down differently, for instance by claiming it is just a matter of the public needing to grow up.
It's like when people say they want politicians to cooperate and compromise. Most of the time they don't, they want the other side to do what they want. And I have a suspicion that while there are idealists, many times people don't want less dumbed down politics, they want politics to align to what they want, and if that happens to not be dumbed down all the better.
On topic and a point I made on David's Saturday thread. A plurality of voters don't care whether Johnson is competent, has the nation's interests at heart, is principled etc. As long as that's the case, he and not Starmer will be PM.
Voters are making choices. They are choosing the charlatan. And it seems they know he is such.
Spot on. Let's stop giving the public an easy ride. They need to grow up.
It's the classic left-wing response - those nasty voters going blue.
It's the classic response of somebody who cares about this country and despairs of the dumbing down of its politics.
There's a word of difference between understanding why the public are making the choices they are, and figuring out how to persuade them to make different choices, and petulantly whining that the public are idiots who don't know what is good for them.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist but when it comes to the dumbing down of politics - the fact of which I think is close to undeniable - I am not content to always be just shrugging my shoulders and saying "Oh well, that's how it is these days." If everyone does that it will only get worse. Some of the vox pops are so depressing. I want the public to wise up and take things a bit more seriously. I can't see how expressing that fervent hope is petulant. Maybe it's always been like this - I'm open to that notion - but I strongly sense not. And in any case this is now and now is what's most important.
I think it has always been like this. I've observed it for many years though vox pop have become more popular in recent years. I always tune out for vox pop. They irritate me so much. Yet very occasionally you get a pearl of wisdom.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
There was quite a lot of 'social realism' issues in the soaps in the 1980s compared I suspect to now.
I can't say for sure as I haven't watched any for years.
You know, I have been wondering about the entire denialist thing.
- It's not an issue, the death rate's no worse than any other year - oops, try... - It's only killing those at death's door. Okay, maybe not, let's try... - The lockdown isn't working, so forget doing it, the death rate should have turned by now. Oh. Let's try... - Only one in ten thousand will really die, we won't have... oh... - The infection rate turned around quite quickly after lockdown, so counting back, it was probably only the fact we got almost everyone possible working from home, closed restaurants, cinemas, schools, pubs, sports facilities, gyms, and instituted social distancing that did it instead. So we don't need any of that. Hang on. Ummm. - It's unnecessary, look at Sweden, their economy is... oh, worse than their neighbours who locked down and had a tenth the death rate. Um. - Look, if you're younger and without any co-morbidities, and get hospital assistance if it's needed, you'll almost certainly recover (like if you're shot by a pistol somewhere other than your head or chest). So it's as if your completely unaffected, and who cares about infecting other people, anyway? Just gloss over the fact that getting so ill you'll be hospitalised isn't as vanishingly unlikely as we'd like you to think, forget about the poor bastards you'd infect, and ignore the way so many people have lingering damage and on-going health problems over all demographics. Why can't we pretend nothing's happened and go to the pub just like before and stuff?
I did assume it was all the "I'm all right Jack, I want to be able to do whatever I could do before because I had it nice then, thank you very much," without caring for the other poor bastards that aren't as healthy, but the hospitalisation rates across demographics and the lingering effects made that look unlikely.
Now I think it's a combination of fear and a desperate desire for things to be as they were.
After all, it's an invisible menace. It's out there. You don't know where. You don't know when you'll be affected - or if you'll be affected. But if it just so happened that I happen to be safe from it, by my age and health, then it's okay. Nothing to fear. And, actually, if I can convince myself of this, then it's only a short step to convincing myself that we can go back to normal and I can resume my happy, comfortable life. Oh, others may die, but, as Lord Farquad said in Shrek, for many people: "That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make."
Humans rationalise - we pick the conclusion we want and come up with a route to get there. We can convince ourselves of almost anything, if we close our eyes and try hard enough. Cherry pick the facts you want to believe. Make those who say what you want to hear into authoritative prophets. Torture the data and it will admit anything. And hey, I'm fine with people doing whatever they need to do to overcome fear.
Just not with them peddling dangerous bollocks afterwards.
In my recent experiences the use of masks generally, and in shops in particular, is very small in our area. I have a mask with me in the car and would wear it in a confined space, but I would avoid that situation whenever possible.
I do not use public transport and have not been on a bus in 30 years or more
Comments
The thing that might save Johnson is that he knows his enormous weaknesses and is happy to let others do the policy.
My father deeply was involved, over many years, in the evolution of modern medical ethics. Particularly in the efforts to quantify and provide a consistent moral framework for decisions.
An early memory is the horror with which such an undertaking was considered by people from some educational backgrounds. To replace "feelings" with "facts" in such matters was evil!
On one occasion, a visitor to our home tried to prove his point by posing a what was, in fact, a simple and long standing example of a moral conundrum. Went back to the Greeks...
Being aged about 12, I piped up and answered him. It was nothing clever - if you'd read the example in a book complete with the answers by various philosophers....
Destroy the Civil Service.
And the NHS.
And the MoD.
Starmer seems like he is attempting the former. I suspect many others are still indulging in the latter, because it makes them feel better as it is not then their fault for being unpersuasive.
As for despairing at the dumbing down of politics, I'm pretty sure all parties peddle unreaslistically simple and easy solutions to things, so I don't think anyone is in a position to throw stones at dumbing things down.
This data is *by day of death* - not reporting.
Last 3-5 days subject to revision. last 5 days included for completeness.
You are now as quarter as likely to die after hospitalisation than you were back at the start due to improved treatment.
Given the lies over reporting - actual political pressure to suppress diagnosis and death numbers - in the US, the situation is probably far worse than the raw numbers suggest.
When you add in the financial pressure - going to hospital to be treated for COVID can leave you with a 7 figure bill in the US - the outlook is horrifying.
QED - you know best. It's a puzzle why no-one else can see it.
So at some point Starmer is going to have to tell us what he thinks. But perhaps that view is going to upset a lot of people in the Labour Party, hence why he is staying quiet for now
Very poor decision.
Unfortunately Labour itself is still in somewhat of a hole.
Cases will occur a couple of weeks after infection. Deaths may take a couple more weeks to show up.
For those who are interested in such things for the *UK*
1) First indicator is calls to 111, 999 etc - https://digital.nhs.uk/dashboards/nhs-pathways - are they getting diagnosed with possible COVID19
2) Next is testing - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public
3) Is case data - https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/downloads/csv/coronavirus-cases_latest.csv
4) Is death data - https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk and https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk
There is more - much more, but those are a good start.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-53371014
The Tories are virtually unchanged on 42%, down just 1%, so he is still winning few Tory voters
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1282036573756895235?s=20
Only way to explain Starmer being popular but the party lagging in the polls .
The Red Wall seats do not vote for student politics
"HAHAHA IF CORBYN WAS HERE WE'D BE 20 POINTS AHEAD"
Labour actually does better in current Tory seats than former Labour ones
My favourite is still this (yes, I made it) - all cases in England by specimen date and low level local authority. Then sort with most cases in the last 30 to the top.
I feel rather happier that the increase was mostly a single big outbreak in Herefordshire rather than a more general increase.
Numbers from Leicester will be a little difficult to make sense of for a while because of this kind of thing - in Leicester they are doing masses of testing. Often of asymptomatic people. Since we now have numbers suggesting that 80% of infections are asymptomatic.....
Led by sciencehttps://twitter.com/PeterKGeoghegan/status/1282249720841170945
*At CNN, they literally called disproving a story with facts, thus.
Seems like a very localised outbreak, similar to those seen both in other parts of the UK and elsewhere
Looks like my guess was right - outbreak followed by "Test everyone!"
So they are following science.
That said, I don't think the Conservatives have the air of being ready for Government either - the sense that they're winging it from week to week with no coherent plan (yes, you too Sunak) is very strong.
Following the not science in Cummings head...
Hence the upset from some "health professionals" about Pillar 2 testing - they see it as disturbing their nice, orderly way of doing things.
The outbreak experts, who have dealt with epidemics have a contrasting view - get all the data. Find the edges of the outbreak. Keep testing until you are finding lots of people who are negative.
When they couldn't they realised the infections were happening on a wide spread and so a general lockdown was used.
The gov't is no doubt watching the take up and hoping it can be improved without mandatory wearing, via public transport, businesses taking their own view, etc.
Brexiteers lied again
But they're not necessary now and discouraging people from leaving their homes has multiple negative effects.
p.s. and the number has gone up to 73.
As an aside who controls the reaction to an outbreak in the UK. Can a LA introduce its own lockdown and impose its own rules or does it all have to come from central government?
And surely this is even more the case for the most vulnerable, who have been the ones disproportionately stuck at home to date.
It is clear that Boris and Cummings are intent on changing the cosy civil service and upturn the liberal elite. The changes coming are going to upset establishment as departments and even the HOL are sent to the red wall seats, and post brexit free ports popping up across the country annoying the EU and our own remainers with accusations of our own Singapore on Thames
It will be a chaotic for a few years, no less so than in politics, but in 4 years time who knows what the political landscape will be
Polls just do not matter at present and while Starmer has made a good start there is no prospect of an election on the horizon, and by the time it arrives I expect Boris and Cummings will have left the scene, for bettter or worse
Of course most on here expect, indeed some hope, it will be worse but it could just be much better, only time will tell
And its my experience that people are more likely to think things are getting worse and that change is dangerous.
So what happens if people hear that they now need to wear a mask to go to Asda when previously they didn't ?
Many will think risks are increasing, that shops are unsafe and anywhere outside their home is now generally dangerous.
And those people will not eave their homes withe the consequent negative economic, social and health effects.
Looks like you're right. If you add a sharpie at the right point and erase the stuff afterwards, the lockdown was completely unnecessary. As long as we use this chart, anyway.
It's a bit messy, but I'm sure there are denialists out there who can make it better for you.
*Bonus points for the reference.
I rather suspect they don't.
But if they want to encourage mask wearing they should do.
I would imagine that people who want compulsory masks in shops would also wear masks when they go to shops.
They may not want masks when outside, e.g. for a walk, as they are apparently needed less when outside.
Why suspect others of being hypocrites?
'Projection'?
But the simultaneous ideas of making mask wearing compulsory in low risk shops while providing financial incentives to go to non mask wearing higher risk pubs and restaurants is imbecilic.
Most popular chat in the UK is about football and gossip - in contrast to say most pubs in ireland where you can have a decent political argument.
I don't think YOU can change it. You can try talking politics in a UK pub but the response is likely to be "boring" or aggressive.
It's the culture. Perhaps if the soaps included decent political discussions. 'Til Death Do Us Part used to feature some fascinating political discussions.
Q1. Am I in Waitrose or am I in Lidl?
Q2. There is no Q2.
We should all hope politics is not dumbed down anymore than is necessary for we the public to actually understand significant issues, since we can hardly all be experts in everything, and it will be a long and not easy fight to do it. But I seriously doubt most people care to address the issue, since they respond to the dumbing down by dumbing things down differently, for instance by claiming it is just a matter of the public needing to grow up.
It's like when people say they want politicians to cooperate and compromise. Most of the time they don't, they want the other side to do what they want. And I have a suspicion that while there are idealists, many times people don't want less dumbed down politics, they want politics to align to what they want, and if that happens to not be dumbed down all the better.
I can't say for sure as I haven't watched any for years.
- It's not an issue, the death rate's no worse than any other year - oops, try...
- It's only killing those at death's door. Okay, maybe not, let's try...
- The lockdown isn't working, so forget doing it, the death rate should have turned by now. Oh. Let's try...
- Only one in ten thousand will really die, we won't have... oh...
- The infection rate turned around quite quickly after lockdown, so counting back, it was probably only the fact we got almost everyone possible working from home, closed restaurants, cinemas, schools, pubs, sports facilities, gyms, and instituted social distancing that did it instead. So we don't need any of that. Hang on. Ummm.
- It's unnecessary, look at Sweden, their economy is... oh, worse than their neighbours who locked down and had a tenth the death rate. Um.
- Look, if you're younger and without any co-morbidities, and get hospital assistance if it's needed, you'll almost certainly recover (like if you're shot by a pistol somewhere other than your head or chest). So it's as if your completely unaffected, and who cares about infecting other people, anyway? Just gloss over the fact that getting so ill you'll be hospitalised isn't as vanishingly unlikely as we'd like you to think, forget about the poor bastards you'd infect, and ignore the way so many people have lingering damage and on-going health problems over all demographics. Why can't we pretend nothing's happened and go to the pub just like before and stuff?
I did assume it was all the "I'm all right Jack, I want to be able to do whatever I could do before because I had it nice then, thank you very much," without caring for the other poor bastards that aren't as healthy, but the hospitalisation rates across demographics and the lingering effects made that look unlikely.
Now I think it's a combination of fear and a desperate desire for things to be as they were.
After all, it's an invisible menace. It's out there. You don't know where. You don't know when you'll be affected - or if you'll be affected. But if it just so happened that I happen to be safe from it, by my age and health, then it's okay. Nothing to fear. And, actually, if I can convince myself of this, then it's only a short step to convincing myself that we can go back to normal and I can resume my happy, comfortable life. Oh, others may die, but, as Lord Farquad said in Shrek, for many people: "That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make."
Humans rationalise - we pick the conclusion we want and come up with a route to get there. We can convince ourselves of almost anything, if we close our eyes and try hard enough. Cherry pick the facts you want to believe. Make those who say what you want to hear into authoritative prophets. Torture the data and it will admit anything. And hey, I'm fine with people doing whatever they need to do to overcome fear.
Just not with them peddling dangerous bollocks afterwards.
I do not use public transport and have not been on a bus in 30 years or more