I’d be careful with comments like that. I think it’s very close to the sort of thing that could get OGH a few very firm letters
But it's fine to post freely that Jeremy Corbyn and anyone supporting him is a raging antisemite.
Yes just like its fine to say that Jimmy Saville abused children.
Truth is an absolute defence.
On this topic I'm afraid you ARE a troll.
No, you're blinded by faux loyalty.
I have no reason to troll Corbyn, he's history and helped give us a massive majority. Why would I want to troll him? And doing so now only makes Starmer look better in context, so what possible reason would I have to do that?
I attack Corbyn for being an antisemite not to score partisan points, but because he is an antisemite. So are Rebecca Long Bailey, Chris Williamson etc . . . none of them now on the Labour Front Bench so what partisan reason would I have to troll that?
I don't know. But then I don't know what caused you to say that Boris Johnson was quite muscly.
Sometimes you troll. Not often - hence why I defended you yesterday against that charge - but just now and again you do.
And needless to say I can usually spot it and hence can cut my cloth accordingly.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
Yes. If it's 6 deaths extra/day... the current level of deaths is closer to 80. So it's not that much of a change?
It might be a smaller effect than those who died due to COVID but weren't tested.
I suspect this is going to be much more relevant politically, as govt sees a way to throw doubt on figures showing lots of people have died. Anyway, we know excess mortality is the way to go.
Are current deaths close to 80? I thought they were lower than that now.
We still only have day of death numbers for England, but this is a fair proxy. So these numbers include the deaths we are discussing.
It's been under 80 for 2 weeks.
Hospital deaths - the series most often posted on here (and Cricket Wyvern's) is substantially less than 80 at the moment.
The above (that I posted) is all England deaths)
The following is England hospital deaths, by day of death
Yes, and helpful too - I meant my reply more to Philip as to where his misunderstanding may have come from.
I've had a massive and baffling email from eBay about what I'm supposed to do when selling car parts into the EU after 01/01/2021. It seems to boil down to, "U r fuked m8, lol."
I’d be careful with comments like that. I think it’s very close to the sort of thing that could get OGH a few very firm letters
But it's fine to post freely that Jeremy Corbyn and anyone supporting him is a raging antisemite.
Yes just like its fine to say that Jimmy Saville abused children.
Truth is an absolute defence.
On this topic I'm afraid you ARE a troll.
No, you're blinded by faux loyalty.
I have no reason to troll Corbyn, he's history and helped give us a massive majority. Why would I want to troll him? And doing so now only makes Starmer look better in context, so what possible reason would I have to do that?
I attack Corbyn for being an antisemite not to score partisan points, but because he is an antisemite. So are Rebecca Long Bailey, Chris Williamson etc . . . none of them now on the Labour Front Bench so what partisan reason would I have to troll that?
I don't know. But then I don't know what caused you to say that Boris Johnson was quite muscly.
Sometimes you troll. Not often - hence why I defended you yesterday against that charge - but just now and again you do.
And needless to say I can usually spot it and hence can cut my cloth accordingly.
I’d be careful with comments like that. I think it’s very close to the sort of thing that could get OGH a few very firm letters
But it's fine to post freely that Jeremy Corbyn and anyone supporting him is a raging antisemite.
Yes just like its fine to say that Jimmy Saville abused children.
Truth is an absolute defence.
On this topic I'm afraid you ARE a troll.
No, you're blinded by faux loyalty.
I have no reason to troll Corbyn, he's history and helped give us a massive majority. Why would I want to troll him? And doing so now only makes Starmer look better in context, so what possible reason would I have to do that?
I attack Corbyn for being an antisemite not to score partisan points, but because he is an antisemite. So are Rebecca Long Bailey, Chris Williamson etc . . . none of them now on the Labour Front Bench so what partisan reason would I have to troll that?
I don't know. But then I don't know what caused you to say that Boris Johnson was quite muscly.
Sometimes you troll. Not often - hence why I defended you yesterday against that charge - but just now and again you do.
And needless to say I can usually spot it and hence can cut my cloth accordingly.
I didn't say he was "quite muscly". I said he was active and a cyclist so would have more muscles than a 17 stone couch potato, making the idea he was 17 stone entirely plausible to me.
You can be both fat and have muscles - in fact many very fat people do have considerable muscles because eg a 17 stone person's legs is carrying another seven stones of weight than what a 10 stone person's legs are carrying. Imagine loading a seven stone backpack onto a 10 stone person and telling them to carry that at all times whenever they're walking around.
That you still don't understand that shows your own ignorance not mine.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
Really sorry I only just noticed this post. One of your funniest un-insightful to date! I think you must be smoking something, and I guess you did inhale. Bill Clinton lol!!!
How many Tory shire local councillors are going to be happy with this?
Most market towns already have a Mayor and if Tory district and county councillors face losing their seats then their will be a huge revolt
I'm sure there will. And?
Describe a mechanism by which unhappy Conservative councillors can enforce their will on Boris. Then you're talking.
Otherwise, they are as powerless as the Supreme Court.
By refusing to campaign for the party at local and national elections, by raising hell at party conference in full view of the media and by electing a party board more in touch with the grassroots and that goes for members too who will have fewer council seats available to stand in.
They also re select MPs as the bulk of the local party associations and that will feedback to MPs on whom Boris relies for his majority.
The Supreme Court is hardly powerless either, it is the supreme interpreter of the law
Sorry, but that's nowhere near enough.
The PM doesn't think he needs campaigners. 2016 and 2019 were both won with digital. Look at the Red Wall seats won from a minimal council base.
Conference is only of concern to the W1 bubble, and fairly easy to stage-manage anyway.
Deselecting MPs... because Boris is going to shower the area with cash? Really?
Boris is a populist. He has a direct line to The People. He doesn't need the party any more. At most, he needs to keep half the MPs on board, which ought to be a doddle. And when Boris doesn't need people, he has a track record of dumping on them from a great height.
And the Supreme Court? Yes, it's the supreme interpreter of the law. It told Johnson that his government had acted unlawfully. But it couldn't punish him, so whatevs.
The marginals were certainly helped to win by canvassers eg Great Grimsby is one Red Wall seat I know was flooded with Tory activists.
Conference with angry scenes from the floor dominates the headlines as in the 1980s.
MPs are reselected by councillors and party activists, if they revolt to save their skins they will have to follow suit and vote down the scrapping of district councillors.
No party leader is beyond the party, even Thatcher and Blair found that out eventually, if you lose the party base then they will topple you.
Boris of course could not pass Brexit because of the Supreme Court until he got a majority but even with a majority the Supreme Court still interprets the law.
If Boris loses the party base and imposes regionalism on local districts and reduces the impact of local town Mayors there will be a revolt not seen from Tory grassroots and councillors for decades
I've been a party member, I've stuffed leaflets through letterboxes in the twilight of Wednesday-into-Thursday. And now I feel like a parent telling their daughter that they shouldn't go on a date with the local lothario. Of course, I'm not getting anywhere.
If only I knew the political equivalent of urging you to take a mobile phone and a condom with you. Because Johnson will do to you what he does to everyone.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
Yes. If it's 6 deaths extra/day... the current level of deaths is closer to 80. So it's not that much of a change?
It might be a smaller effect than those who died due to COVID but weren't tested.
I suspect this is going to be much more relevant politically, as govt sees a way to throw doubt on figures showing lots of people have died. Anyway, we know excess mortality is the way to go.
Are current deaths close to 80? I thought they were lower than that now.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
Surely a candidate for this year's igNobel prize for medicine (though probably a distant third to PHE, and the winner, for his contributions to the science of hydroxychloroquine, Donald J Trump).
Modelling the maximal active consumption rate and its plasticity in humans—perspectives from hot dog eating competitions https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0096 Gut capacity and plasticity have been examined across multiple species, but are not typically explored in the context of extreme human performance. Here, I estimate the theoretical maximal active consumption rate (ACR) in humans, using 39 years of historical data from the annual Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest. Through nonlinear modelling and generalized extreme value analysis, I show that humans are theoretically capable of achieving an ACR of approximately 832 g min−1 fresh matter over 10 min duration. Modelling individual performances across 5 years reveals that maximal ACR significantly increases over time in ‘elite’ competitive eaters, likely owing to training effects. Extreme digestive plasticity suggests that eating competition records are quite biologically impressive, especially in the context of carnivorous species and other human athletic competitions....
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
Yes. If it's 6 deaths extra/day... the current level of deaths is closer to 80. So it's not that much of a change?
It might be a smaller effect than those who died due to COVID but weren't tested.
I suspect this is going to be much more relevant politically, as govt sees a way to throw doubt on figures showing lots of people have died. Anyway, we know excess mortality is the way to go.
Are current deaths close to 80? I thought they were lower than that now.
I've had a massive and baffling email from eBay about what I'm supposed to do when selling car parts into the EU after 01/01/2021. It seems to boil down to, "U r fuked m8, lol."
Hopefully you will be more patriotic and only sell car parts to your fellow Britons in the future.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
Of course I don't know for sure, but I really doubt that this correction is going to significantly move the UK in the death league table. Maybe a 5% reduction overall, at most? The UK looks bad relative to those countries using the ONS data alone.
I would agree it doesn't look anything like the whole answer. The differences at the moment are just too large, in the Spain example 60% more.
It may be that we recorded a lower percentage of infections, especially in the early days where testing was very slow to get going but we are now testing as much as anyone else and more than most. Its also possible, as @NerysHughes suggests, that the Spanish figure is actually lower than it should be.
I don't normally consider myself naïve but I have been astonished how poor the statistics of well funded western health services have been. It means that figures for other countries without those resources are not much short of guesswork.
I've had a massive and baffling email from eBay about what I'm supposed to do when selling car parts into the EU after 01/01/2021. It seems to boil down to, "U r fuked m8, lol."
On that wider issue, I've just been reading the equivalent for holidaymakers -
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
As a coffee drinker I'm more bothered by how the milk is treated than brand of coffee. I can be one of those who goes to Starbucks and take a dozen or more words to explain what drink I want.
As I'm not going out much anymore I got myself a home milk frother recently to enable me to make at home cappuccinos or lattes. Got some syrups online too, so can make an at home Caramel Macchiato or similar at a fraction of the going out cost.
Started experimenting with using almond milk instead of regular milk too (for health reasons) - I don't take sugar in my coffee but need a syrup in the at home unsweetened almond milk lattes I've made or its too bitter.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I'm a tea drinker - found coffee too physically addictive so don't touch it any more. I don't really care what tea I drink as long as it's not bloody Earl Grey and it's not adulterated with milk. We get Clipper because it's Fair Trade and for fancy stuff loose leaf Sri Lankan tea, owing to family loyalties.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
I've got to make my own drinks when we head back in (Start of Aug)
And I see that the way back to the old normal is passing the buck via devolving responsibility to local authorities and businesses
genius!
So when the economy crashes we will discover it was our fault.
Putting the onus on businesses is exactly what any Conservative government should do!
Its not for the government to tell employers how to run their companies and it never, ever should be! I would never support such an authoritarian government as that.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
Was the offender defenestrated or ritually burned?
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I'm a tea drinker - found coffee too physically addictive so don't touch it any more. I don't really care what tea I drink as long as it's not bloody Earl Grey and it's not adulterated with milk. We get Clipper because it's Fair Trade and for fancy stuff loose leaf Sri Lankan tea, owing to family loyalties.
Tea can be physically addictive as well - plenty of caffeine in there.
A certain pipe smoking politician used to get... problematic... if he didn't have tea to hand. Non stop.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
This really doesn't say much for your interview technique. How could you have missed this?
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
Interesting, isn;t it, that the estimable Professor Gupta's Oxford study is all of a sudden front page news in the Mail, when her views on Corona and T-cell immunity have been known for a while.
Just as the government desperately need people to go back to work!
It wasn't particularly good or funny, but I didn't see what was racist about it.
Possibly as a Hindu the representation as a bull or cow is very insulting. But I'm not sure.
That image - Hindu as a large, aggressive bull/cow - is a standard trope in some extremely racist* anti-Hindu propaganda.
Bit like the Jews being associated with rats thing.
*I'm talking Der Sturmer grade filth here.
You learn something new every day. It's quite reasonable to imagine that Bell was unaware of this, although you could argue that as a political cartoonist perhaps he should make sure he is more aware of these things than the general public would be. In his defence as I recall the offending picture depicted Johnson in exactly the same way, and as far as I know he is not a Hindu. For me Bell is quite hit and miss, at his best he can be absolutely brilliant but he's a bit too misanthropic for my tastes overall. He should have withdrawn this cartoon once its offensive connotations were made clear to him.
Interesting, isn;t it, that the estimable Professor Gupta's Oxford study is all of a sudden front page news in the Mail, when her views on Corona and T-cell immunity have been known for a while.
Just as the government desperately need people to go back to work!
It wasn't particularly good or funny, but I didn't see what was racist about it.
Possibly as a Hindu the representation as a bull or cow is very insulting. But I'm not sure.
That image - Hindu as a large, aggressive bull/cow - is a standard trope in some extremely racist* anti-Hindu propaganda.
Bit like the Jews being associated with rats thing.
*I'm talking Der Sturmer grade filth here.
You learn something new every day. It's quite reasonable to imagine that Bell was unaware of this, although you could argue that as a political cartoonist perhaps he should make sure he is more aware of these things than the general public would be. In his defence as I recall the offending picture depicted Johnson in exactly the same way, and as far as I know he is not a Hindu. For me Bell is quite hit and miss, at his best he can be absolutely brilliant but he's a bit too misanthropic for my tastes overall. He should have withdrawn this cartoon once its offensive connotations were made clear to him.
The cartoon, which I won't reproduce here, depicted Boris as fat, blond and with tiny eyes.
The image for Patel was interesting to the point, that I would ask where he got the idea. I have seen similar in extremist leaflets at a local place of worship.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I'm a tea drinker - found coffee too physically addictive so don't touch it any more. I don't really care what tea I drink as long as it's not bloody Earl Grey and it's not adulterated with milk. We get Clipper because it's Fair Trade and for fancy stuff loose leaf Sri Lankan tea, owing to family loyalties.
Tea can be physically addictive as well - plenty of caffeine in there.
A certain pipe smoking politician used to get... problematic... if he didn't have tea to hand. Non stop.
Yes that's true. Tea is kind of like methadone to coffee's heroin. As long as I limit myself to three cups a day then I can go without with no accute withdrawal symptoms. That was impossible for coffee so I've not touched it for years.
And I see that the way back to the old normal is passing the buck via devolving responsibility to local authorities and businesses
genius!
So when the economy crashes we will discover it was our fault.
Putting the onus on businesses is exactly what any Conservative government should do!
Its not for the government to tell employers how to run their companies and it never, ever should be! I would never support such an authoritarian government as that.
Thats just a political fantasy. Businesses are told what to do by governments from how to incorporate, how to hire, how to do accounts, what to pay people, hours people can work, health and safety practices, waste disposal, data protection, applications for licenses and many more. Some of it is necessary, some of it beneficial and some a hindrance but real political discussions are about what rules govts impose on businesses not whether they impose any.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I'm a tea drinker - found coffee too physically addictive so don't touch it any more. I don't really care what tea I drink as long as it's not bloody Earl Grey and it's not adulterated with milk. We get Clipper because it's Fair Trade and for fancy stuff loose leaf Sri Lankan tea, owing to family loyalties.
Tea can be physically addictive as well - plenty of caffeine in there.
A certain pipe smoking politician used to get... problematic... if he didn't have tea to hand. Non stop.
Yes that's true. Tea is kind of like methadone to coffee's heroin. As long as I limit myself to three cups a day then I can go without with no accute withdrawal symptoms. That was impossible for coffee so I've not touched it for years.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I'm a tea drinker - found coffee too physically addictive so don't touch it any more. I don't really care what tea I drink as long as it's not bloody Earl Grey and it's not adulterated with milk. We get Clipper because it's Fair Trade and for fancy stuff loose leaf Sri Lankan tea, owing to family loyalties.
Tea can be physically addictive as well - plenty of caffeine in there.
A certain pipe smoking politician used to get... problematic... if he didn't have tea to hand. Non stop.
Yes that's true. Tea is kind of like methadone to coffee's heroin. As long as I limit myself to three cups a day then I can go without with no accute withdrawal symptoms. That was impossible for coffee so I've not touched it for years.
I've had a massive and baffling email from eBay about what I'm supposed to do when selling car parts into the EU after 01/01/2021. It seems to boil down to, "U r fuked m8, lol."
"U r fuked m8, lol." is in fact the Government advice for anyone dealing with Brexit consequences.
Which is why they are happier pushing videos promoting Britain as an "independent trading nation" (does anyone have a clue what that means, apart from a massive increase in red tape, cost and inconvenience and in some cases a loss of livelihood?)
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
This really doesn't say much for your interview technique. How could you have missed this?
Mr Eagles was probably concentrating on irrelevant skills in the interview - legal, accounting, IT, managerial etc
He probably didn't even bother to ask the vital questions - such as their views on proportion representation.....
And I see that the way back to the old normal is passing the buck via devolving responsibility to local authorities and businesses
genius!
So when the economy crashes we will discover it was our fault.
Putting the onus on businesses is exactly what any Conservative government should do!
Its not for the government to tell employers how to run their companies and it never, ever should be! I would never support such an authoritarian government as that.
Thats just a political fantasy. Businesses are told what to do by governments from how to incorporate, how to hire, how to do accounts, what to pay people, hours people can work, health and safety practices, waste disposal, data protection, applications for licenses and many more. Some of it is necessary, some of it beneficial and some a hindrance but real political discussions are about what rules govts impose on businesses not whether they impose any.
Which is what the government has done. The government has set rules but then isn't telling businesses how to operate within those rules, just to operate within the rules. Which is what the government should do.
The government should set standards as to whether it is safe to work at work . . . but on the question of whether its more productive or economic to work at work, or work from home, that's not the government's job to answer.
I agree with Boris giving freedom for businesses to agree with their staff to return to work subject to covid requirements
However, the HMG are huge employers and will civil servants start returning to their offices ?
We're going back in, lots of covid stuff in place (Masks away from desks, natural distancing, metric tonnes of alcohol hand wash). Have to wonder how many employers will take the piss though.
It wasn't particularly good or funny, but I didn't see what was racist about it.
Possibly as a Hindu the representation as a bull or cow is very insulting. But I'm not sure.
That image - Hindu as a large, aggressive bull/cow - is a standard trope in some extremely racist* anti-Hindu propaganda.
Bit like the Jews being associated with rats thing.
*I'm talking Der Sturmer grade filth here.
You learn something new every day. It's quite reasonable to imagine that Bell was unaware of this, although you could argue that as a political cartoonist perhaps he should make sure he is more aware of these things than the general public would be. In his defence as I recall the offending picture depicted Johnson in exactly the same way, and as far as I know he is not a Hindu. For me Bell is quite hit and miss, at his best he can be absolutely brilliant but he's a bit too misanthropic for my tastes overall. He should have withdrawn this cartoon once its offensive connotations were made clear to him.
The cartoon, which I won't reproduce here, depicted Boris as fat, blond and with tiny eyes.
The image for Patel was interesting to the point, that I would ask where he got the idea. I have seen similar in extremist leaflets at a local place of worship.
It portrays Johnson as a bull too, with horns, a ring through his nose and hooves for hands. He has no eyes, because his face is portrayed as a giant arse, as I believe is a long running theme in Bell's cartoons. Perhaps we are thinking of different pictures.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
That's a sackable offence.
Depends on the milk-in firster.
If it is a milk-in firster with tea made in a pot first that is an outbreak of civilisation. If it is a milk-in firster then add teabag, that is a burning-at-the-stake offence.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
Update on the office - it's eerie with just 7 of us in an open section that usually has about 80 people, we've all moves our stuff to the common breakout areas to work so it's much better. It feels so good working with other people again. We're all minded to do once or twice a week once we're in to our new building.
Everyone wore masks on the tube and in Vinters Place, but not once we got into our office. There's no COVID safe anything as far as I can tell, but that's probably because we're the first people to come back other than the cleaners and technicians and I don't think the company wants to spend money when we're about to move in a few weeks.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
That's a sackable offence.
Depends on the milk-in firster.
If it is a milk-in firster with made on a pot that is an improvement. If it is a milk-in firster then add teabag, that is a burning-at-the-stake offence.
I don't understand tea drinkers that haven't invested in a teapot and insist on putting the bag into their mug.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
I agree with Boris giving freedom for businesses to agree with their staff to return to work subject to covid requirements
However, the HMG are huge employers and will civil servants start returning to their offices ?
Have to wonder how many employers will take the piss though.
Is this some guidance we should all be more aware of?
The local Leicester lockdown and mandatory masks in shops have personally given me a bit of confidence in the Gov't being able to take further measures as and when needed. I'd have total travel bans from Iran, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and possibly the USA mind; or at least Gov't ENFORCED quarantine from JFK (Lots of people HAVE to travel JFK - LHR for some reason it seems)
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
9 per thousand seems low - we don't all live over 100 years old?
The government has finally realised there is no new normal because we simply cannot afford it.
They are desperately looking for a way back to the old normal that won't scare the horses.
If you think it is going to go back to the old normal any time soon you are in for a shock.
Work from home isn’t going anywhere. Maybe some teams will meet for a few days a month somewhere, but the days of millions of people cramming onto trains at 6am to spend two hours travelling to the most expensive real estate in the country, are probably over and not coming back.
Bad news for coffee shops and commercial property investors (and GDP figures) but good for pretty much everyone else.
FPT - and in reply to @Anabobazina's question re what thought of the US polling. Sorry for getting back so late,
1. State polls are low quality. Their 2016 record was p1ss poor so it is too much to read into things;
2. As have mentioned before, it is what people are doing and saying that probably provides more insight than an opinion poll. Very few in the Republicans (apart from the Lincoln project types) are calling for Trump because he is dragging down the party. I think there was some concern building pre-his Mount Rushmore speech but that seems to have lessened.
3. On the ground, the Republicans are outpacing the Democrats in new voter registrations (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/11/trump-voter-registration-355152). That has been helped by the impact of the Coronavirus outbreak. That may lessen but no signs yet that anything is majorly changing.
4. The economy is getting better.June retail sales were up 7.5% MoM vs expectations of a 5% increase. Things are still sh1t overall but Trump still leads on the economy.
5. There should be several canaries in the coalmine for Biden on some of the sub-questions in these polls. According to the YouGov poll (if you trust it), 48% think Biden wants to defund the Police and 49% that he is a puppet of the hard left. There have also been signs conservative Democrats (who are overrepresented in swing states) are concerned re the left-wing swing. For example, the pro-Palestinian tone of many of the progressive Democrats may alienate the Jewish Democrat vote in Florida for example.
One aside: I had a re-look over Nate Silver's 2016 forecasts. I know a fair few on here have said he wasn't that far out because he gave Trump a 30% chance. That is true on the day but he had massively boosted that number in the final few days - as late as Oct 29th he was giving Trump only a 19% chance. It may have been the Comey effect but the cynic in me says that he tweaked his model so he could hedge his bets in the final few days. His state predictions were also quite sh1t (he gave Trump a 16,5% chance of winning Wisconsin, a 21% chance of winning MI and a 23% chance of winning PA).
It's not really surprising that a model based on opinion polls would give Trump a bigger chance as the polls narrowed, is it? So you're suggestion they tweaked the model to hedge their bets doesn't seem to make much sense.
Of course, if they had had a much higher chance of Trump winning those states, then they would have had a higher chance of trump winning the presidency. It is precisely because the opinion polls in those states turned out to be wrong that Clinton was favorite.
You're just making in effect circular arguments, whose weakness undermines your case that Trump should be favorite, at least for me.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
I agree with Boris giving freedom for businesses to agree with their staff to return to work subject to covid requirements
However, the HMG are huge employers and will civil servants start returning to their offices ?
Have to wonder how many employers will take the piss though.
Is this some guidance we should all be more aware of?
The local Leicester lockdown and mandatory masks in shops have personally given me a bit of confidence in the Gov't being able to take further measures as and when needed. I'd have total travel bans from Iran, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and possibly the USA mind; or at least Gov't ENFORCED quarantine from JFK (Lots of people HAVE to travel JFK - LHR for some reason it seems)
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
I was following this last night.
Basically, some people were saying that the methodology used for counting deaths was thus -
1) If you are tested for COVID and get a positive, you go on a list 2) If you die at any time in the future, PHE says you died of COVID.
So in the extreme case, you get the sniffles. Get a test. Positive. Recover. 6 months later you die in a car crash. COVID victim.....
The reason they seem to be doing this, is to be extremely aggressive in counting cases *in*. Avoiding under counting.
Consider the following case - COVID, recovers, long terms effects. These long term effects include massively reduced lung function. Dies of a heart attack 6 months later - probably caused by the stress on the cardiovascular system from the reduced lung function. What do you call that?
Good question, but I would prefer consistency (at least within the UK) and preferably in all worldwide figures.
If Sunak is so popular, it rather blunts the "Starmer is boring" meme, because you don't get much more boring than Sunak. He has to be one of the dullest men ever to have held high office, or have I missed something?
You've missed something.
Sunak is smooth and charming. He's a different kind of popular to Boris. Its more of a Bill Clinton style of popular.
I think Sunak is clearly the smartest person in the Cabinet but I don't think you can really compare him to Bill Clinton - a comparison which in some respects is overly flattering and in others perhaps the opposite. Clinton really had an ability to connect with people, especially the kind of voters that the Democrats don't do a great job with these days. Much as I respect Sunak's intellect and charm, I really don't see him in those terms. Clinton would never have been seen with a $200 coffee mug, for instance.
Despite being well off, which Clinton was too and did have his own things that showed that eg where he holidayed etc, Sunak is quickly developing a reputation for finding ways to connect with ordinary people and getting people to talk about him in ordinary terms . . . whether it be him shopping in a sandwich shop, or drinking Yorkshire Tea etc
It's all a bit painfully manufactured in Sunak's case though. The whole Yorkshire Tea thing is cringeworthy. Clinton only became well of after he was President, for a US politician he was not rich at all, and he really came from nothing in a way that would probably be next to impossible in this country (off the top of my head only Alan Johnson is maybe comparable). Sunak's bio (head boy at Winchester, married to the daughter of a billionaire) isn't really comparable. He has the competent and human side covered, personally I think he should leave the man of the people schtick alone, it just makes him look daft.
I'm not sure what is objectionable about a Yorkshire MP drinking Yorkshire tea.
Seemed to be a case of some twitter baboons doing some trolling just because they could.
I've never been a fan of my former MP Denis Skinner, but I certainly would have no objection to him taking PR opportunities with Thorntons Toffee or Denby Pottery.
Point taken. I've never really understood the whole Yorkshire Tea thing - naming a product after a place whose role in its creation is utterly marginal. But then I'm not a Yorkshireman, and my impression is that Yorkshiremen take the whole Yorkshire thing quite seriously (as of course they have every right to).
While a coffee drinker, I'v noticed many tea drinkers become fanatical about which tea they drink. Interestingly, this doesn't often end up in wine-snobbery-style exotic, expensive, hard to find stuff. Just "I must have x tea. Or else."
I’m not a tea or coffee drinker but there was open warfare in the office last year when I hired a milk in firster tea drinker/maker.
That's a sackable offence.
Depends on the milk-in firster.
If it is a milk-in firster with made on a pot that is an improvement. If it is a milk-in firster then add teabag, that is a burning-at-the-stake offence.
I don't understand tea drinkers that haven't invested in a teapot and insist on putting the bag into their mug.
I never understand people with one of those little brown leaf-tea teapots with the spout connected in the exact place to maximise tealeaves in the cup.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
"According to a study from Italy's National Social Security Institute, INPS, the number of deaths in the country in March and April was 156,429, an excess of 46,909 deaths over the same months in 2015-2019.
Official figures from Italy's Civil Protection agency reported 27,938 deaths where the cause of death had been attributed to COVID-19 by April 30."
Absolutely. I have no qualms seeing untalented, unfunny racist cartoonist get cancelled.
If Matt got cancelled that would be a different matter.
Matt’s never getting cancelled, mostly because he’s funny and not racist.
There was an article about him when he celebrated many years with the DT a while back, that said the publishers would consider his departure a resigning matter for the editor - oh, and by the way he has standing offers from the Mail and the Sun, so don’t upset him!
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
9 per thousand seems low - we don't all live over 100 years old?
Mr Meeks does/did this for a living so I'm guessing he knows what he's talking about.
I'm not an actuary but my educated guess would be the difference is down to population distribution and changing life expectancies. It is why our population is growing.
In a nation with an elderly and falling population total the opposite might be the case.
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
I was following this last night.
Basically, some people were saying that the methodology used for counting deaths was thus -
1) If you are tested for COVID and get a positive, you go on a list 2) If you die at any time in the future, PHE says you died of COVID.
So in the extreme case, you get the sniffles. Get a test. Positive. Recover. 6 months later you die in a car crash. COVID victim.....
The reason they seem to be doing this, is to be extremely aggressive in counting cases *in*. Avoiding under counting.
Consider the following case - COVID, recovers, long terms effects. These long term effects include massively reduced lung function. Dies of a heart attack 6 months later - probably caused by the stress on the cardiovascular system from the reduced lung function. What do you call that?
Good question, but I would prefer consistency (at least within the UK) and preferably in all worldwide figures.
These things always end up complicated - more complication than can fit in a gotcha headline.
Consistency worldwide will be achieved in about 10,000 years.
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
"According to a study from Italy's National Social Security Institute, INPS, the number of deaths in the country in March and April was 156,429, an excess of 46,909 deaths over the same months in 2015-2019.
Official figures from Italy's Civil Protection agency reported 27,938 deaths where the cause of death had been attributed to COVID-19 by April 30."
That figure is in close agreement with the FT graphs. The fact that the graphs end on May 22 is irrelevant as the excess deaths occurred in March/April in most countries, during the peak of the pandemic.
I agree with Boris giving freedom for businesses to agree with their staff to return to work subject to covid requirements
However, the HMG are huge employers and will civil servants start returning to their offices ?
Have to wonder how many employers will take the piss though.
Is this some guidance we should all be more aware of?
The local Leicester lockdown and mandatory masks in shops have personally given me a bit of confidence in the Gov't being able to take further measures as and when needed. I'd have total travel bans from Iran, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and possibly the USA mind; or at least Gov't ENFORCED quarantine from JFK (Lots of people HAVE to travel JFK - LHR for some reason it seems)
Executive Club membership?
Got to get the tier points to keep that gold card!
(Not this year for me though, not been on a plane since January and not planning on going near one for a few months yet! Skype and Webex work well when they have to).
Unless there has been a sudden and massive risk of dying in car accidents etc., I don't see how the PHE reporting changes much. The ONS excess death figures suggest a huge increase in the number of deaths relative to a "normal" year, even after the massive decrease in activity which would actually reduce the occurrence of car accidents etc.
No one is arguing that there have not been excess deaths and quite a lot of them. What is being discussed is how many. This will be significant if there remains a much larger death toll in the UK than equivalent countries like France or Germany. Why did that happen? Are we more obese, less fit, more ethnic minorities, are our hospitals less competent, etc?
Spain has a smaller population than us but has had 305k cases to our 295k. Despite that we are recording 45k deaths compared to their 28k. This is a massive difference. We need to find out why, ideally before there is a second wave.
The European figures are far from accurate. In Italy the death toll is at least double that being reported.
I don't think that is the case. Italy is reporting fewer excess deaths than us. From the FT:
One thing with excess deaths is not every nation even measures that the same.
EG I believe in the UK excess deaths are simply deaths above the average, whereas in the US the CDC measures excess deaths as deaths above the 95 CI upper threshold. The difference for that averages as about 2k deaths per week or about 100k deaths per year difference.
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
9 per thousand seems low - we don't all live over 100 years old?
Mr Meeks does/did this for a living so I'm guessing he knows what he's talking about.
I'm not an actuary but my educated guess would be the difference is down to population distribution and changing life expectancies. It is why our population is growing.
In a nation with an elderly and falling population total the opposite might be the case.
6 per day if that is occurring could approximate to 42 per week which could potentially be the majority of all deaths now being recorded. It also means they'll never get down to saying 0 deaths unless this is fixed even if the virus were eliminated.
9 per thousand seems low - we don't all live over 100 years old?
Mr Meeks does/did this for a living so I'm guessing he knows what he's talking about.
I'm not an actuary but my educated guess would be the difference is down to population distribution and changing life expectancies. It is why our population is growing.
In a nation with an elderly and falling population total the opposite might be the case.
Mr Eagles was probably concentrating on irrelevant skills in the interview - legal, accounting, IT, managerial etc
He probably didn't even bother to ask the vital questions - such as their views on proportion representation.....
I ask the really important questions like 'do you think pineapple is an acceptable topping on pizza?'
I have to admit my fellow interviewer was shocked with the hire, she said you expect milk in firsters to be Southerners who water their shandies, not from a girl from Bolton! It really wasn't on her radar.
Anyhoo, a peace deal was negotiated. Milk in firsters made their own tea.
Eventually the milk in firster stopped being a milk in firster.
Law schools ‘demand higher A-Level grades’ from poorer students.
Students from less advantaged backgrounds require higher A-level grades than their wealthier peers to attend the UK's top law schools, according to research carried out by Clifford Chance, York Law School and The Bridge Group consultancy.
The research paper said that students from lower socio-economic groups are required to have higher A-level grades (AAB+) compared with their contemporaries from richer backgrounds. The report found that 80% of the top 20 law schools in the UK are less likely to accept those poorer students on their courses compared with their peers.
Less than a quarter of applicants to the top UK law schools come from lower socio-economic backgrounds, which is "considerably lower" than the 40% proportion of people with that background, said the report. The research highlighted that only 65% of the top UK law schools would accept vocational qualifications (such as BTECs) rather than A- levels.
The research concluded that students from less advantaged households are half as likely to attend the UK's elite law schools than their peers. The researchers said admission and access to law school matters because "the legal profession remains dominated by people from higher socio-economic backgrounds, especially within leading law firms and in the judiciary."
Interesting, isn;t it, that the estimable Professor Gupta's Oxford study is all of a sudden front page news in the Mail, when her views on Corona and T-cell immunity have been known for a while.
Just as the government desperately need people to go back to work!
The 'if' in the abstract is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I'm all in favour of analyses like these, but we need some evidence of significant numbers of people who actually are immune for reasons other than being previously infected before taking this as anything more than an interesting 'what-if' exercise. Also, this is the same prof who was pushing an IFR that would imply, from known deaths, that almost all the population to several times the population had already been infected a couple of months back, isn't it?
It wasn't particularly good or funny, but I didn't see what was racist about it.
Possibly as a Hindu the representation as a bull or cow is very insulting. But I'm not sure.
That image - Hindu as a large, aggressive bull/cow - is a standard trope in some extremely racist* anti-Hindu propaganda.
Bit like the Jews being associated with rats thing.
*I'm talking Der Sturmer grade filth here.
You learn something new every day. It's quite reasonable to imagine that Bell was unaware of this, although you could argue that as a political cartoonist perhaps he should make sure he is more aware of these things than the general public would be. In his defence as I recall the offending picture depicted Johnson in exactly the same way, and as far as I know he is not a Hindu. For me Bell is quite hit and miss, at his best he can be absolutely brilliant but he's a bit too misanthropic for my tastes overall. He should have withdrawn this cartoon once its offensive connotations were made clear to him.
The cartoon, which I won't reproduce here, depicted Boris as fat, blond and with tiny eyes.
The image for Patel was interesting to the point, that I would ask where he got the idea. I have seen similar in extremist leaflets at a local place of worship.
It portrays Johnson as a bull too, with horns, a ring through his nose and hooves for hands. He has no eyes, because his face is portrayed as a giant arse, as I believe is a long running theme in Bell's cartoons. Perhaps we are thinking of different pictures.
That's the one I recvall too. Was it not said to be a response to some comment by Mr Johnson about bulling along, or similar?
Comments
Sometimes you troll. Not often - hence why I defended you yesterday against that charge - but just now and again you do.
And needless to say I can usually spot it and hence can cut my cloth accordingly.
We are currently at 50 or so deaths per day overall (averaged). With 20 or so per day in hospital (averaged). Which means 30 outside hospital.
So 6 per day "extra" does have some meaning.
Incidentally, anyone who says that deaths are levelling off, needs to explain where they are getting their data from.
It's not in the by-day-of-death data.
https://www.self-build.co.uk/10-things-i-hate-about-the-planning-system/
Fun.
You can be both fat and have muscles - in fact many very fat people do have considerable muscles because eg a 17 stone person's legs is carrying another seven stones of weight than what a 10 stone person's legs are carrying. Imagine loading a seven stone backpack onto a 10 stone person and telling them to carry that at all times whenever they're walking around.
That you still don't understand that shows your own ignorance not mine.
If only I knew the political equivalent of urging you to take a mobile phone and a condom with you. Because Johnson will do to you what he does to everyone.
https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/deaths
Modelling the maximal active consumption rate and its plasticity in humans—perspectives from hot dog eating competitions
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0096
Gut capacity and plasticity have been examined across multiple species, but are not typically explored in the context of extreme human performance. Here, I estimate the theoretical maximal active consumption rate (ACR) in humans, using 39 years of historical data from the annual Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Contest. Through nonlinear modelling and generalized extreme value analysis, I show that humans are theoretically capable of achieving an ACR of approximately 832 g min−1 fresh matter over 10 min duration. Modelling individual performances across 5 years reveals that maximal ACR significantly increases over time in ‘elite’ competitive eaters, likely owing to training effects. Extreme digestive plasticity suggests that eating competition records are quite biologically impressive, especially in the context of carnivorous species and other human athletic competitions....
It may be that we recorded a lower percentage of infections, especially in the early days where testing was very slow to get going but we are now testing as much as anyone else and more than most. Its also possible, as @NerysHughes suggests, that the Spanish figure is actually lower than it should be.
I don't normally consider myself naïve but I have been astonished how poor the statistics of well funded western health services have been. It means that figures for other countries without those resources are not much short of guesswork.
@foxy didn't believe it either iirc.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2020/07/how-government-quietly-revealed-all-ways-which-brexit-will-make-our-lives
They are desperately looking for a way back to the old normal that won't scare the horses.
As I'm not going out much anymore I got myself a home milk frother recently to enable me to make at home cappuccinos or lattes. Got some syrups online too, so can make an at home Caramel Macchiato or similar at a fraction of the going out cost.
Started experimenting with using almond milk instead of regular milk too (for health reasons) - I don't take sugar in my coffee but need a syrup in the at home unsweetened almond milk lattes I've made or its too bitter.
genius!
So when the economy crashes we will discover it was our fault.
Bit like the Jews being associated with rats thing.
*I'm talking Der Sturmer grade filth here.
Its not for the government to tell employers how to run their companies and it never, ever should be! I would never support such an authoritarian government as that.
A certain pipe smoking politician used to get... problematic... if he didn't have tea to hand. Non stop.
Just as the government desperately need people to go back to work!
Pure coincidence I am sure.
For me Bell is quite hit and miss, at his best he can be absolutely brilliant but he's a bit too misanthropic for my tastes overall. He should have withdrawn this cartoon once its offensive connotations were made clear to him.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.15.20154294v1
If Matt got cancelled that would be a different matter.
The image for Patel was interesting to the point, that I would ask where he got the idea. I have seen similar in extremist leaflets at a local place of worship.
Which is why they are happier pushing videos promoting Britain as an "independent trading nation" (does anyone have a clue what that means, apart from a massive increase in red tape, cost and inconvenience and in some cases a loss of livelihood?)
However, the HMG are huge employers and will civil servants start returning to their offices ?
He probably didn't even bother to ask the vital questions - such as their views on proportion representation.....
The government should set standards as to whether it is safe to work at work . . . but on the question of whether its more productive or economic to work at work, or work from home, that's not the government's job to answer.
If it is a milk-in firster with tea made in a pot first that is an outbreak of civilisation.
If it is a milk-in firster then add teabag, that is a burning-at-the-stake offence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loYRymELHx8
Everyone wore masks on the tube and in Vinters Place, but not once we got into our office. There's no COVID safe anything as far as I can tell, but that's probably because we're the first people to come back other than the cleaners and technicians and I don't think the company wants to spend money when we're about to move in a few weeks.
I'd have total travel bans from Iran, South Africa, Mexico, Brazil and possibly the USA mind; or at least Gov't ENFORCED quarantine from JFK (Lots of people HAVE to travel JFK - LHR for some reason it seems)
Bad news for coffee shops and commercial property investors (and GDP figures) but good for pretty much everyone else.
Of course, if they had had a much higher chance of Trump winning those states, then they would have had a higher chance of trump winning the presidency. It is precisely because the opinion polls in those states turned out to be wrong that Clinton was favorite.
You're just making in effect circular arguments, whose weakness undermines your case that Trump should be favorite, at least for me.
Some countries are making it easy to find (thank you ONS). Some are even trying to remove previous years, to avoid comparison.
Properly designed teapots don't need a strainer.
"According to a study from Italy's National Social Security Institute, INPS, the number of deaths in the country in March and April was 156,429, an excess of 46,909 deaths over the same months in 2015-2019.
Official figures from Italy's Civil Protection agency reported 27,938 deaths where the cause of death had been attributed to COVID-19 by April 30."
There was an article about him when he celebrated many years with the DT a while back, that said the publishers would consider his departure a resigning matter for the editor - oh, and by the way he has standing offers from the Mail and the Sun, so don’t upset him!
I'm not an actuary but my educated guess would be the difference is down to population distribution and changing life expectancies. It is why our population is growing.
In a nation with an elderly and falling population total the opposite might be the case.
Consistency worldwide will be achieved in about 10,000 years.
(Not this year for me though, not been on a plane since January and not planning on going near one for a few months yet! Skype and Webex work well when they have to).
EG I believe in the UK excess deaths are simply deaths above the average, whereas in the US the CDC measures excess deaths as deaths above the 95 CI upper threshold. The difference for that averages as about 2k deaths per week or about 100k deaths per year difference.
Death rate 10,681 per week (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53233066)
UK population 65.5 million.
Gives 0.000163 odd per week - 0.163 per thousand per week.
which gives us 8.47 per thousand per year.
I have to admit my fellow interviewer was shocked with the hire, she said you expect milk in firsters to be Southerners who water their shandies, not from a girl from Bolton! It really wasn't on her radar.
Anyhoo, a peace deal was negotiated. Milk in firsters made their own tea.
Eventually the milk in firster stopped being a milk in firster.
Law schools ‘demand higher A-Level grades’ from poorer students.
Students from less advantaged backgrounds require higher A-level grades than their wealthier peers to attend the UK's top law schools, according to research carried out by Clifford Chance, York Law School and The Bridge Group consultancy.
The research paper said that students from lower socio-economic groups are required to have higher A-level grades (AAB+) compared with their contemporaries from richer backgrounds. The report found that 80% of the top 20 law schools in the UK are less likely to accept those poorer students on their courses compared with their peers.
Less than a quarter of applicants to the top UK law schools come from lower socio-economic backgrounds, which is "considerably lower" than the 40% proportion of people with that background, said the report. The research highlighted that only 65% of the top UK law schools would accept vocational qualifications (such as BTECs) rather than A- levels.
The research concluded that students from less advantaged households are half as likely to attend the UK's elite law schools than their peers. The researchers said admission and access to law school matters because "the legal profession remains dominated by people from higher socio-economic backgrounds, especially within leading law firms and in the judiciary."
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/law-schools-demand-higher-level-grades-poorer-students
#DigIn
I'm all in favour of analyses like these, but we need some evidence of significant numbers of people who actually are immune for reasons other than being previously infected before taking this as anything more than an interesting 'what-if' exercise. Also, this is the same prof who was pushing an IFR that would imply, from known deaths, that almost all the population to several times the population had already been infected a couple of months back, isn't it?
But very easily interpreted differently ...