CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
At the moment, nowhere.
What we really ought to be asking is why we're getting panic flap situations developing in Spain, France and Belgium, but not in the UK and (insofar as I'm aware) Italy. Identify the causes and perhaps we can work out what everyone can get away with and what we all need to avoid?
My anecdotal view from a recent (and well timed) trip to NL is that we have lifted slower and with more social distancing rules in place. Amsterdam was quite busy and the tram I caught worryingly so (should have got the Metro but I'm not used to that central line yet). The Hague much less so.
I think that's right. In Spain, for example, all the nightclubs in Ibiza were opened, and I'm pretty sure the thousands of young people moving rhythmically to dance music weren't all social distancing. (Or, indeed, wearing masks.)
Could also be a cultural thing. Save for the occasional panic over illegal raves, are young adults gathering in large numbers anywhere? It's not simply the fact that the Government refused to re-open nightclubs, pubs that haven't developed a strong food offer have been in steep decline for years.
Youngsters aren't, by and large, big drinkers anymore, they mostly don't have very much money and eating out is dear (not that there's much evidence to suggest that the restaurants that have reopened haven't been taking their Covid secure responsibilities seriously in any event - I can't immediately recall any media reports of Covid clusters that have been traced back to restaurants.)
Add to that the relative lack of intergenerational households in the UK - notably that the young probably aren't seeing their grandparents every five minutes, so Covid would more likely have to pass through a chain via Mum or Dad to get at them - and that would suggest that young adults may be much less effective vectors in this country then elsewhere. They're picking the disease up in smaller numbers, and are less likely to pass it on to vulnerable individuals if they do.
Yes, but Scottish IS a brand when it comes to advertising, one that is very appealing, persuasive, powerful in its impact upon consumers. Much more so methinks than English or Welsh (to say nothing of Cornish) and in same league as Irish.
Scotland as a brand must rank among the top national brands around the world. Perhaps in part because Scottish does NOT have negative connotations that crop up with British and English (also strong brands) for many people in many countries.
Scotland is a massive worldwide brand, and most Scots are rightly proud of that brand - including the more coherent of the nats. Not sure they really need people to be professionally offended for them.
I did blink to find a senior London Conservative administration minister going on about the wonders of the brand. They have not given the impression of being at all interested in it -
I’m fairly certain that the London administration is run by Labour.
Sorry: quite right to pick me up on it: I meant Westminster rather than London (not a usual mistake, but too much time painting the shed and a glass or two of decent NZ white on an empty stomach)
CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
Waiting in the wings for when more vulnerable or not-exposed-yet people get exposed.
See the Spanish Flu pattern in Denmark for a possible pattern.
As a PHE stats bod told me last Jan/Feb ... small blip with return to school, then second wave in the winter when the immune systems are lower.
Nice casual reference to Spanish Flu there and the unspoken spectre of 50 million deaths. When we get to the spring and we haven’t suffered a health catastrophe, are people finally going to put this all into perspective?
I do have to thank Eadric for his early doomsdaying because it allowed me to make a six figure sum in the options market, as well as to warn everyone I know to buy some Andrex. But even his spiritual successor LadyG has a more balanced view of the pandemic now.
It’s serious, in fact very nasty indeed. And we still don’t have a full understanding of it. But it’s not Disease X and our ability to treat, understand the transmission mechanism and ability to properly shield the vulnerable is an order of magnitude better than it was. And with hindsight the indiscriminate lockdown of Q2 may well have been a net harm, even if social distancing and other such lighter measures have proved on balance sensible as we built our understanding.
Roll on the (imperfect) vaccine and public enquiries and let’s treat this as the warning sign and dress rehearsal for something that might come down the line that really does deserve to be spoke of in the same breath as Spanish Flu.
What will the Government do for young people in the long term so we can buy houses
Well, it's trying to make it easier and cheaper to build them,. The opposition parties which young people tend to vote for are slagging them off for it. Funny old world, isn't it?
It's supply and demand. You need to build enough new houses so the price falls. Unfortunately everyone who owns property is a vested interest and doesn't want this to happen. Stopping the population growing might help as well.
Post-COVID there might be lots of city centre apartments in former office blocks which would be great for youngsters (and active retirees).
Very little to do with ‘supply and demand’ and a lot to do with the price of money, the ease with which foreign criminalsinvestors can buy into our property market, and the appallingly low level of taxation on property assets compared with many other countries worldwide.
Maybe in certain markets such as central London. But the way building land is "banked" and released slowly keeps supply down and the inbuilt blocks in the planning system effectively do the same. Maybe landlords do need to be taxed on the current rather than historic value of their property though.
Could you explain the last sentence. Which taxes exactly? And which landlords? And - I guess - which properties :-) ?
(Foreigners buying properties here are taxed very heavily if it isn't their first property in the UK and personally owned. Though perhaps you know about some dodges that I don't?)
PS In most local authorities known to me there is a long queue of people wanting to bring land forward for development, that the LA won't allow even though they control the quotas for how much building they will allow.
PPS The number of first time buyers was in 2019 I think at its highest since 2007.
The next generation of barristers have complained that they were forced to urinate in bottles and buckets during their professional ethics exam this week.
The students were told they would fail their two hour 45 minute Bar Professional Training Course assessment if they left their desk to go to the loo, or if they did not maintain eye contact with their online invigilator.
And so the nation's future barristers, having drunk copious amounts of water to stay hydrated on one of the hottest days of the year, found themselves weeing in containers while staring at a stranger on their laptop.
Bar student Tian Juin See told RollOnFriday that when he asked to be excused about an hour into the exam, the online proctor refused.
"I tried to hold it, but a little while later I asked again and he said no", said Tian.
"It became rather unbearable and it was having an effect on my concentration", he said. Despite "literally begging" the proctor, Tian was told that "policy doesn't allow the use of toilets during exams. I told him that if I'm not allowed, I'm going to have to pee in the bottle, but he still wouldn't let me use the toilet".
"Finally, I couldn't hold it anymore", said Tian. "so I dumped out the water in my bottle all over my carpet", though he couldn't see where he was pouring it as the proctor said he was not allowed to turn away from the camera, "and attempted to take a piss into my bottle, blindly, while trying not to move around too much or look away from my screen".
"When I was done I raised the now yellow bottle to the webcam as if to say: 'Are you happy now?'"
Others were pushed to similarly humiliating extremes. Sophie Lamb, who is studying at BPP University in Leeds, said she had to maintain eye contact with her webcam while urinating, after she was unable to get booked at a test centre. "I took a bucket in and wore a long maxi dress so that I could squat down with my face still on camera", she said. "The sacrifices we make for our careers".
BPTC student Pete Kennedy said, "shorts and 5L bottle for me. Think I stealthed it."
R4 now running the story that according to Trump, Kamala might not be eligible for VP
Trump gets overreported. The media is not the least important of his enablers.
Not sure. The fact that the current US President is running an apparently deliberate campaign, on several fronts, to delegitimise the result of a democratic election in his own country even before it happens is a big story. An awful, "how the f*** did we get here?" story, but a big one nevertheless. Are the media meant to pretend it isn't happening?
I suspect it means they're desperate to get people in.
And if that's what's happening at Oxford then the likes of Scumbag ** aren't going to be turning down anyone.
After all we've been told repeatedly that much of Higher Education is on the verge of bankruptcy.
** That's a Young Ones reference to those PBers who are young ones.
Not what I'm hearing from people in the sector - not a shortage of students for Autumn entry.
Remember that there will be fewer people going on a gap year, and students are of an age where they are less vulnerable. So there's no great demand problem from what I've heard.
Also, don't a lot of Oxford courses/colleges still do admissions test (and will have done them pre-lockdown) so often the A-levels are an afterthought.
So what were all those universities to go bust / lecturers to lose jobs / foreign students to stay away stories about ?
Surely not an attempt to get another handout or excuse to put up fees ?
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Yes. It was.
And that was not to disparage 1985.
Then it must have be something very special. Which channel? I’ll see if I can watch it.
BTW how were your results for A-level? Mine were in line with what I would have expected, but I was not involved in the predictions as the HoD did all of that and I don’t know which were marked down (although some were I know).
I suspect it means they're desperate to get people in.
And if that's what's happening at Oxford then the likes of Scumbag ** aren't going to be turning down anyone.
After all we've been told repeatedly that much of Higher Education is on the verge of bankruptcy.
** That's a Young Ones reference to those PBers who are young ones.
Not what I'm hearing from people in the sector - not a shortage of students for Autumn entry.
Remember that there will be fewer people going on a gap year, and students are of an age where they are less vulnerable. So there's no great demand problem from what I've heard.
Also, don't a lot of Oxford courses/colleges still do admissions test (and will have done them pre-lockdown) so often the A-levels are an afterthought.
So what were all those universities to go bust / lecturers to lose jobs / foreign students to stay away stories about ?
Surely not an attempt to get another handout or excuse to put up fees ?
The foreign student issue is a whole different matter. But those are largely postgraduate students paying top dollar and subsidising everyone else. I'm talking your standard 18 year old undergraduate (which is what the A-level story is about).
R4 now running the story that according to Trump, Kamala might not be eligible for VP
Trump gets overreported. The media is not the least important of his enablers.
Not sure. The fact that the current US President is running an apparently deliberate campaign, on several fronts, to delegitimise the result of a democratic election in his own country even before it happens is a big story. An awful, "how the f*** did we get here?" story, but a big one nevertheless. Are the media meant to pretend it isn't happening?
That's a big story as is much else Trump related. But I mean the trivia and the reality tv stuff. Far too much space given to that. Just feeds the troll.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
The crosstabs are grim for Trump and the Republicans with Biden at 50% or more across the nation and leading in the South and Midwest comfortably.
The Fox News poll was discussed on here earlier and I can't find any meaningful crosstabs.
Trump's job approval ranges from -5 with Rasmussen to -15 with NPR/PBS/Marist.
As for Massachusetts, Trump lost by 27 last time and the latest poll puts him 33 behind Biden though a poll earlier in the week put the gap at 36 so all might not yet be lost for the President.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Yes. It was.
And that was not to disparage 1985.
Then it must have be something very special. Which channel? I’ll see if I can watch it.
BTW how were your results for A-level? Mine were in line with what I would have expected, but I was not involved in the predictions as the HoD did all of that and I don’t know which were marked down (although some were I know).
Glad to hear yours were OK. Mine were In line with what I asked for as well.
No idea what the GCSEs will be like though.
Edit - it was on BBC2. Every snooker fan should watch it. It was unbe-fucking-lievable.
The next generation of barristers have complained that they were forced to urinate in bottles and buckets during their professional ethics exam this week.
The students were told they would fail their two hour 45 minute Bar Professional Training Course assessment if they left their desk to go to the loo, or if they did not maintain eye contact with their online invigilator.
And so the nation's future barristers, having drunk copious amounts of water to stay hydrated on one of the hottest days of the year, found themselves weeing in containers while staring at a stranger on their laptop.
Bar student Tian Juin See told RollOnFriday that when he asked to be excused about an hour into the exam, the online proctor refused.
"I tried to hold it, but a little while later I asked again and he said no", said Tian.
"It became rather unbearable and it was having an effect on my concentration", he said. Despite "literally begging" the proctor, Tian was told that "policy doesn't allow the use of toilets during exams. I told him that if I'm not allowed, I'm going to have to pee in the bottle, but he still wouldn't let me use the toilet".
"Finally, I couldn't hold it anymore", said Tian. "so I dumped out the water in my bottle all over my carpet", though he couldn't see where he was pouring it as the proctor said he was not allowed to turn away from the camera, "and attempted to take a piss into my bottle, blindly, while trying not to move around too much or look away from my screen".
"When I was done I raised the now yellow bottle to the webcam as if to say: 'Are you happy now?'"
Others were pushed to similarly humiliating extremes. Sophie Lamb, who is studying at BPP University in Leeds, said she had to maintain eye contact with her webcam while urinating, after she was unable to get booked at a test centre. "I took a bucket in and wore a long maxi dress so that I could squat down with my face still on camera", she said. "The sacrifices we make for our careers".
BPTC student Pete Kennedy said, "shorts and 5L bottle for me. Think I stealthed it."
Somehow I managed to go through endless school, uni and professional exams without needing to go to the toilet.
As did everyone else in the exam room.
Has something changed to the human body during the last generation which makes imminent death by dehydration such a threat ?
You may have missed that it has been the longest hottest spell since records began, people have been drinking more water than normal to stay hydrated.
The more you drink, the more you piss.
Candidates for the bar are fairly bright, so they should be able to manage their own hydration strategy.
The way to do it is to drink copiously in the days before, to ensure you are fully hydrated.
Then on the day, just drink a little, and nothing closer than 2 hours before the exam.
You won't lose enough while in a sedentary position for a few hours to worry the metabolism. In any case, coping with dehydration is something we have evolved to do. You can be a couple of litres down with no ill effect.
(I ran the hottest ever London Marathon on no more than half a pint before the race, and most of what I picked up at the drinks stations went over my head. I was a bit hot and bothered at the end of the race but nothing a pint of bitter couldn't sort out).
R4 now running the story that according to Trump, Kamala might not be eligible for VP
Trump gets overreported. The media is not the least important of his enablers.
Not sure. The fact that the current US President is running an apparently deliberate campaign, on several fronts, to delegitimise the result of a democratic election in his own country even before it happens is a big story. An awful, "how the f*** did we get here?" story, but a big one nevertheless. Are the media meant to pretend it isn't happening?
Not exactly news that Trumpsky is repeating his 2016 in this as in so much else,
Personally think its BEST for anti-Trumpsky cause to NOT constantly be publicizing his attacks on democracy, in particular his claims re: fraud with election process.
Why? Because this plays into the Putinist vote suppression strategy - don't bother to vote, it's all rigged, your ballot will be lost in the mail, etc., etc. ad infinitum.
Note that is is NOT something Trumpsky dreamed up, GOP has been pumping this bidge on regular basis for some time. BUT leave it to The Donald to push the envelope as per usual with him.
Sorry, but speaking as Democrat, Robert Reich is someone who I wish would put a cork in it. At least until after the first Tuesday after the first Monday this November.
The next generation of barristers have complained that they were forced to urinate in bottles and buckets during their professional ethics exam this week.
The students were told they would fail their two hour 45 minute Bar Professional Training Course assessment if they left their desk to go to the loo, or if they did not maintain eye contact with their online invigilator.
And so the nation's future barristers, having drunk copious amounts of water to stay hydrated on one of the hottest days of the year, found themselves weeing in containers while staring at a stranger on their laptop.
Bar student Tian Juin See told RollOnFriday that when he asked to be excused about an hour into the exam, the online proctor refused.
"I tried to hold it, but a little while later I asked again and he said no", said Tian.
"It became rather unbearable and it was having an effect on my concentration", he said. Despite "literally begging" the proctor, Tian was told that "policy doesn't allow the use of toilets during exams. I told him that if I'm not allowed, I'm going to have to pee in the bottle, but he still wouldn't let me use the toilet".
"Finally, I couldn't hold it anymore", said Tian. "so I dumped out the water in my bottle all over my carpet", though he couldn't see where he was pouring it as the proctor said he was not allowed to turn away from the camera, "and attempted to take a piss into my bottle, blindly, while trying not to move around too much or look away from my screen".
"When I was done I raised the now yellow bottle to the webcam as if to say: 'Are you happy now?'"
Others were pushed to similarly humiliating extremes. Sophie Lamb, who is studying at BPP University in Leeds, said she had to maintain eye contact with her webcam while urinating, after she was unable to get booked at a test centre. "I took a bucket in and wore a long maxi dress so that I could squat down with my face still on camera", she said. "The sacrifices we make for our careers".
BPTC student Pete Kennedy said, "shorts and 5L bottle for me. Think I stealthed it."
These quarantine actions are all about the UK government saying they are doing far better than Europe and nothing else.
Well, that and - save for the moaning holidaymakers who keep getting caught out by them - I suspect that the restrictions are rather popular.
After all, the New Zealand Labour Party is just about the only political party in the democratic world that's polling better than the SNP. There are solid reasons for this. I suspect that a very large fraction of the British electorate would thoroughly approve of a policy of total drawbridge raising, and making everyone who enters the country from outwith the British Isles spend a fortnight's enforced stay at a hotel near Heathrow Airport.
What time is Trump's tweet supporting Lakashenko due?
If the security services abandon him, it’s over.
Still a biggish ‘if’ at the moment though.
Unless Putin sends in the troops (unofficially of course)
I don’t think he will, although at one time not long ago I expected him to. He seems to be annoyed with Lukashenko at the moment.
Edit - he may of course also conclude Lukashenko’s position is untenable but by upsetting him he can earn mega brownie points with ordinary Belorussians and their new president. It is the sort of game he’s played before.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Yes. It was.
And that was not to disparage 1985.
Then it must have be something very special. Which channel? I’ll see if I can watch it.
BTW how were your results for A-level? Mine were in line with what I would have expected, but I was not involved in the predictions as the HoD did all of that and I don’t know which were marked down (although some were I know).
Glad to hear yours were OK. Mine were In line with what I asked for as well.
No idea what the GCSEs will be like though.
Edit - it was on BBC2. Every snooker fan should watch it. It was unbe-fucking-lievable.
Was actually a bit worried about the A-levels as we had made a significant change compared to the year before so that if they just looked at our A-level results it would not have gone well (we had had what was in effect a self-selecting top set doing a different, more challenging qualification, but stopped as it was getting too much logistically).
R4 now running the story that according to Trump, Kamala might not be eligible for VP
Trump gets overreported. The media is not the least important of his enablers.
Not sure. The fact that the current US President is running an apparently deliberate campaign, on several fronts, to delegitimise the result of a democratic election in his own country even before it happens is a big story. An awful, "how the f*** did we get here?" story, but a big one nevertheless. Are the media meant to pretend it isn't happening?
Not exactly news that Trumpsky is repeating his 2016 in this as in so much else,
Personally think its BEST for anti-Trumpsky cause to NOT constantly be publicizing his attacks on democracy, in particular his claims re: fraud with election process.
Why? Because this plays into the Putinist vote suppression strategy - don't bother to vote, it's all rigged, your ballot will be lost in the mail, etc., etc. ad infinitum.
Note that is is NOT something Trumpsky dreamed up, GOP has been pumping this bidge on regular basis for some time. BUT leave it to The Donald to push the envelope as per usual with him.
I agree political opponents should ignore it as that fuels it all. But the foreign media shouldn't really be part of the "anti-Trumsky cause" - the elected President actively working to delegitimise his own election IS a legitimate and significant news story - sorry, but it is.
It's true that it's a repeat of his 2016 stuff, but that is part of the Trump approach which you can't deny is happening, is real and important.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
What will the Government do for young people in the long term so we can buy houses
Well, it's trying to make it easier and cheaper to build them,. The opposition parties which young people tend to vote for are slagging them off for it. Funny old world, isn't it?
It's supply and demand. You need to build enough new houses so the price falls. Unfortunately everyone who owns property is a vested interest and doesn't want this to happen. Stopping the population growing might help as well.
Post-COVID there might be lots of city centre apartments in former office blocks which would be great for youngsters (and active retirees).
Very little to do with ‘supply and demand’ and a lot to do with the price of money, the ease with which foreign criminalsinvestors can buy into our property market, and the appallingly low level of taxation on property assets compared with many other countries worldwide.
Maybe in certain markets such as central London. But the way building land is "banked" and released slowly keeps supply down and the inbuilt blocks in the planning system effectively do the same. Maybe landlords do need to be taxed on the current rather than historic value of their property though.
Could you explain the last sentence. Which taxes exactly? And which landlords? And - I guess - which properties :-) ?
(Foreigners buying properties here are taxed very heavily if it isn't their first property in the UK and personally owned. Though perhaps you know about some dodges that I don't?)
It was a nod to IanB2 really. It was a thought that you normally get taxed on an appreciating asset when you realise, ie sell it. However landlords mini-realise the asset by letting at ever-increasing rents. However maybe rent is already taxed adequately as income.
See if you can track down the reported ups delivery performance to monitor effects of sabotage if it’s happening. It is/was produced by TNS/Kantar and was/is called UNEX the figures are required to be in the public domain, also the UPU Universal Postal Union May also have figures.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
And pensioners, of course. Lots of pensioners still work on the basis that it isn't worth buying anything new after their 70th birthday as they won't get the value out of it... then live another quarter of a century.
I suspect it means they're desperate to get people in.
And if that's what's happening at Oxford then the likes of Scumbag ** aren't going to be turning down anyone.
After all we've been told repeatedly that much of Higher Education is on the verge of bankruptcy.
** That's a Young Ones reference to those PBers who are young ones.
Not what I'm hearing from people in the sector - not a shortage of students for Autumn entry.
Remember that there will be fewer people going on a gap year, and students are of an age where they are less vulnerable. So there's no great demand problem from what I've heard.
Also, don't a lot of Oxford courses/colleges still do admissions test (and will have done them pre-lockdown) so often the A-levels are an afterthought.
So what were all those universities to go bust / lecturers to lose jobs / foreign students to stay away stories about ?
Surely not an attempt to get another handout or excuse to put up fees ?
How about no income over the summer from language schools, open uni study weeks, conferences etc? EST £30,000,000 in my neck of the woods
R4 now running the story that according to Trump, Kamala might not be eligible for VP
BBC is a disgrace
Yeah! How dare they report on what Trump says. They should stick to important stuff like - oohhhh... - someting else.
You shouldn't give racist conspiracy theories air time. This is 2016 all over again.
You can say Trump aired a completely discredited racist conspiracy theory but you don't repeat what it actually is verbatim.
The media is going to fuck up reporting on Trump yet again. I bet there are a dozen journalist gagging to write the first "pivot to centre/today is the day Trump became President" piece of the election campaign as well.
The next generation of barristers have complained that they were forced to urinate in bottles and buckets during their professional ethics exam this week.
The students were told they would fail their two hour 45 minute Bar Professional Training Course assessment if they left their desk to go to the loo, or if they did not maintain eye contact with their online invigilator.
And so the nation's future barristers, having drunk copious amounts of water to stay hydrated on one of the hottest days of the year, found themselves weeing in containers while staring at a stranger on their laptop.
Bar student Tian Juin See told RollOnFriday that when he asked to be excused about an hour into the exam, the online proctor refused.
"I tried to hold it, but a little while later I asked again and he said no", said Tian.
"It became rather unbearable and it was having an effect on my concentration", he said. Despite "literally begging" the proctor, Tian was told that "policy doesn't allow the use of toilets during exams. I told him that if I'm not allowed, I'm going to have to pee in the bottle, but he still wouldn't let me use the toilet".
"Finally, I couldn't hold it anymore", said Tian. "so I dumped out the water in my bottle all over my carpet", though he couldn't see where he was pouring it as the proctor said he was not allowed to turn away from the camera, "and attempted to take a piss into my bottle, blindly, while trying not to move around too much or look away from my screen".
"When I was done I raised the now yellow bottle to the webcam as if to say: 'Are you happy now?'"
Others were pushed to similarly humiliating extremes. Sophie Lamb, who is studying at BPP University in Leeds, said she had to maintain eye contact with her webcam while urinating, after she was unable to get booked at a test centre. "I took a bucket in and wore a long maxi dress so that I could squat down with my face still on camera", she said. "The sacrifices we make for our careers".
BPTC student Pete Kennedy said, "shorts and 5L bottle for me. Think I stealthed it."
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
If you can remember “Money for Nothing” microwave ovens and colour TVs were two of the desirable items listed. That was from 1985 as well.
CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
Waiting in the wings for when more vulnerable or not-exposed-yet people get exposed.
See the Spanish Flu pattern in Denmark for a possible pattern.
As a PHE stats bod told me last Jan/Feb ... small blip with return to school, then second wave in the winter when the immune systems are lower.
Nice casual reference to Spanish Flu there and the unspoken spectre of 50 million deaths. When we get to the spring and we haven’t suffered a health catastrophe, are people finally going to put this all into perspective?
I do have to thank Eadric for his early doomsdaying because it allowed me to make a six figure sum in the options market, as well as to warn everyone I know to buy some Andrex. But even his spiritual successor LadyG has a more balanced view of the pandemic now.
It’s serious, in fact very nasty indeed. And we still don’t have a full understanding of it. But it’s not Disease X and our ability to treat, understand the transmission mechanism and ability to properly shield the vulnerable is an order of magnitude better than it was. And with hindsight the indiscriminate lockdown of Q2 may well have been a net harm, even if social distancing and other such lighter measures have proved on balance sensible as we built our understanding.
Roll on the (imperfect) vaccine and public enquiries and let’s treat this as the warning sign and dress rehearsal for something that might come down the line that really does deserve to be spoke of in the same breath as Spanish Flu.
Um. I haven't made any casual references to anything - rather a precise comparison to a historical example of a mechanism that is analogous to our situation now, where a second wave was generated by exposure of so far unexposed fractions of the population, in answer to your question.
Perhaps go and read about it?
I explored the comparison through conversation with someone who has a 25 year career in public health in this country.
However I'm not sure about casual references to speculative £100k+ profits off the back of a situation which has caused 40k+ deaths so far in just this country. If I'd done that I probably wouldn't be talking about it now.
We already have 750k+ deaths in toto just in wave 1 so far, so I agree that yes it is very serious.
Since I'm personally on the shielding list since a nasty diagnosis during lockdown, I will be taking significant care until we have a vaccine. No house guests for probably another year.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
And pensioners, of course. Lots of pensioners still work on the basis that it isn't worth buying anything new after their 70th birthday as they won't get the value out of it... then live another quarter of a century.
Ironically I'm trying to persuade my oldies to get a new TV, even offered to buy it for them for last Christmas and next Christmas.
If you are a serious respected news organisation and you "neutrally" report what someone says and the thing that someone says is a massively racist statement then you are not just giving a platform to a massive racist you are giving that statement credibility and gravitas.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
If you can remember “Money for Nothing” microwave ovens and colour TVs were two of the desirable items listed. That was from 1985 as well.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
And pensioners, of course. Lots of pensioners still work on the basis that it isn't worth buying anything new after their 70th birthday as they won't get the value out of it... then live another quarter of a century.
Ironically I'm trying to persuade my oldies to get a new TV, even offered to buy it for them for last Christmas and next Christmas.
They will be scared they can’t operate it as these things keep getting more and more complicated. Voice control the best solution.
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
Many of us on black and white TVs! Decoding which shade of grey was blue was half the fun of the snooker in those days.
Before we go all Norfolk millionaire perhaps we should explain to the younger PBers that in 1985 b&w TVs tended to be portables in kitchens and bedrooms rather than the main lounge TV.
Not for my family, nor a lot of others.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
Probably also lots of students and young people in general who only had a b&w licence.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
If you can remember “Money for Nothing” microwave ovens and colour TVs were two of the desirable items listed. That was from 1985 as well.
If you are a serious respected news organisation and you "neutrally" report what someone says and the thing that someone says is a massively racist statement then you are not just giving a platform to a massive racist you are giving that statement credibility and gravitas.
The BBC should report what he said, and then maybe ask someone for the background and whether it's true.
I am fed up with being told someone has said something "unacceptable" but I am not allowed to know what it is, so I can't form an opinion about whether it is, in fact, unacceptable, or someone is trying to infringe their freedom of speech.
I don't think this sort of tweet is helpful to the Democrats.
It seems to me to rest on a false premise. All the information we have is that Pence doesn’t like Trump very much. Moreover, he may be puritanical and rigidly inflexible but I’ve never heard it suggested he’s corrupt. Why would he pardon Trump and risk lifelong opprobrium when actually if he became President he could successfully dissociate himself from a proven loser and show himself the defender of the constitution by managing a successful transition?
Ford made the calculation that pardoning Nixon would do less damage to America than letting him stand trial. In this he was probably right. But it’s hard to make the same argument for Trump. The system of government withstood Nixon and brought him down. Trump has subverted and annihilated that system.
What will the Government do for young people in the long term so we can buy houses
Well, it's trying to make it easier and cheaper to build them,. The opposition parties which young people tend to vote for are slagging them off for it. Funny old world, isn't it?
It's supply and demand. You need to build enough new houses so the price falls. Unfortunately everyone who owns property is a vested interest and doesn't want this to happen. Stopping the population growing might help as well.
Post-COVID there might be lots of city centre apartments in former office blocks which would be great for youngsters (and active retirees).
Very little to do with ‘supply and demand’ and a lot to do with the price of money, the ease with which foreign criminalsinvestors can buy into our property market, and the appallingly low level of taxation on property assets compared with many other countries worldwide.
Maybe in certain markets such as central London. But the way building land is "banked" and released slowly keeps supply down and the inbuilt blocks in the planning system effectively do the same. Maybe landlords do need to be taxed on the current rather than historic value of their property though.
Could you explain the last sentence. Which taxes exactly? And which landlords? And - I guess - which properties :-) ?
(Foreigners buying properties here are taxed very heavily if it isn't their first property in the UK and personally owned. Though perhaps you know about some dodges that I don't?)
It was a nod to IanB2 really. It was a thought that you normally get taxed on an appreciating asset when you realise, ie sell it. However landlords mini-realise the asset by letting at ever-increasing rents. However maybe rent is already taxed adequately as income.
CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
At the moment, nowhere.
What we really ought to be asking is why we're getting panic flap situations developing in Spain, France and Belgium, but not in the UK and (insofar as I'm aware) Italy. Identify the causes and perhaps we can work out what everyone can get away with and what we all need to avoid?
My anecdotal view from a recent (and well timed) trip to NL is that we have lifted slower and with more social distancing rules in place. Amsterdam was quite busy and the tram I caught worryingly so (should have got the Metro but I'm not used to that central line yet). The Hague much less so.
I think that's right. In Spain, for example, all the nightclubs in Ibiza were opened, and I'm pretty sure the thousands of young people moving rhythmically to dance music weren't all social distancing. (Or, indeed, wearing masks.)
Could also be a cultural thing. Save for the occasional panic over illegal raves, are young adults gathering in large numbers anywhere? It's not simply the fact that the Government refused to re-open nightclubs, pubs that haven't developed a strong food offer have been in steep decline for years.
Youngsters aren't, by and large, big drinkers anymore, they mostly don't have very much money and eating out is dear (not that there's much evidence to suggest that the restaurants that have reopened haven't been taking their Covid secure responsibilities seriously in any event - I can't immediately recall any media reports of Covid clusters that have been traced back to restaurants.)
Add to that the relative lack of intergenerational households in the UK - notably that the young probably aren't seeing their grandparents every five minutes, so Covid would more likely have to pass through a chain via Mum or Dad to get at them - and that would suggest that young adults may be much less effective vectors in this country then elsewhere. They're picking the disease up in smaller numbers, and are less likely to pass it on to vulnerable individuals if they do.
Students are doing more socialising in student-house groups at home, rather than going to pubs etc. So there is a pattern of bubbling in student-house groups.
And I don't think that many will be going to see granny at weekends.
Unis are focusing on lectures online, but face to face for small groups where social distance will be more possible.
High speed internet in student houses is going to be crucial for the next year or so.
BBC R4 consumer strand have done a couple of programmes about it, and I personally know about two or three places.
So there is potential for relatively large amounts of transmission in that population in some isolation from other groups.
Not so sure about the section of the student population who are home-based.
CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
At the moment, nowhere.
What we really ought to be asking is why we're getting panic flap situations developing in Spain, France and Belgium, but not in the UK and (insofar as I'm aware) Italy. Identify the causes and perhaps we can work out what everyone can get away with and what we all need to avoid?
My anecdotal view from a recent (and well timed) trip to NL is that we have lifted slower and with more social distancing rules in place. Amsterdam was quite busy and the tram I caught worryingly so (should have got the Metro but I'm not used to that central line yet). The Hague much less so.
I think that's right. In Spain, for example, all the nightclubs in Ibiza were opened, and I'm pretty sure the thousands of young people moving rhythmically to dance music weren't all social distancing. (Or, indeed, wearing masks.)
Could also be a cultural thing. Save for the occasional panic over illegal raves, are young adults gathering in large numbers anywhere? It's not simply the fact that the Government refused to re-open nightclubs, pubs that haven't developed a strong food offer have been in steep decline for years.
Youngsters aren't, by and large, big drinkers anymore, they mostly don't have very much money and eating out is dear (not that there's much evidence to suggest that the restaurants that have reopened haven't been taking their Covid secure responsibilities seriously in any event - I can't immediately recall any media reports of Covid clusters that have been traced back to restaurants.)
Add to that the relative lack of intergenerational households in the UK - notably that the young probably aren't seeing their grandparents every five minutes, so Covid would more likely have to pass through a chain via Mum or Dad to get at them - and that would suggest that young adults may be much less effective vectors in this country then elsewhere. They're picking the disease up in smaller numbers, and are less likely to pass it on to vulnerable individuals if they do.
Not so sure about the section of the student population who are home-based.
I can avoid them by avoiding Wetherspoons on Thursdays
The next generation of barristers have complained that they were forced to urinate in bottles and buckets during their professional ethics exam this week.
The students were told they would fail their two hour 45 minute Bar Professional Training Course assessment if they left their desk to go to the loo, or if they did not maintain eye contact with their online invigilator.
And so the nation's future barristers, having drunk copious amounts of water to stay hydrated on one of the hottest days of the year, found themselves weeing in containers while staring at a stranger on their laptop.
Bar student Tian Juin See told RollOnFriday that when he asked to be excused about an hour into the exam, the online proctor refused.
"I tried to hold it, but a little while later I asked again and he said no", said Tian.
"It became rather unbearable and it was having an effect on my concentration", he said. Despite "literally begging" the proctor, Tian was told that "policy doesn't allow the use of toilets during exams. I told him that if I'm not allowed, I'm going to have to pee in the bottle, but he still wouldn't let me use the toilet".
"Finally, I couldn't hold it anymore", said Tian. "so I dumped out the water in my bottle all over my carpet", though he couldn't see where he was pouring it as the proctor said he was not allowed to turn away from the camera, "and attempted to take a piss into my bottle, blindly, while trying not to move around too much or look away from my screen".
"When I was done I raised the now yellow bottle to the webcam as if to say: 'Are you happy now?'"
Others were pushed to similarly humiliating extremes. Sophie Lamb, who is studying at BPP University in Leeds, said she had to maintain eye contact with her webcam while urinating, after she was unable to get booked at a test centre. "I took a bucket in and wore a long maxi dress so that I could squat down with my face still on camera", she said. "The sacrifices we make for our careers".
BPTC student Pete Kennedy said, "shorts and 5L bottle for me. Think I stealthed it."
They will also be hit by massive ‘fines’ (terminal dues) for failing to deliver international mail to standard. I don’t know if USPS is regulated as is Royal Mail but if they are then more fines are likely.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
I'm assuming he wants to create chaos in the postal system so that he can blame it in the event that Biden wins. The general argument would be that the election was fundamentally flawed, that Trump would've won if a load of votes hadn't gone missing in the post (or had possibly been tampered with in some fashion,) and that, therefore, the election should be regarded as void. There will then follow an immense amount of rabble rousing and litigation.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
I'm assuming he wants to create chaos in the postal system so that he can blame it in the event that Biden wins. The general argument would be that the election was fundamentally flawed, that Trump would've won if a load of votes hadn't gone missing in the post (or had possibly been tampered with in some fashion,) and that, therefore, the election should be regarded as void. There will then follow an immense amount of rabble rousing and litigation.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
In the primaries this year more Democrats voted postal as a proportion than Republicans AFAIK.
The irrelevant Republican primaries vs the contested Democratic ones?
There have been loads of state elections and Dems have voted by post far more than GOPers.
There was a NY special election which someone on here was touting as evidence that Trunp.was.doing great because it was a 30 point blow out for the GOP candidate. But after postal votes were counted it was only a 5 point win.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
I'm assuming he wants to create chaos in the postal system so that he can blame it in the event that Biden wins. The general argument would be that the election was fundamentally flawed, that Trump would've won if a load of votes hadn't gone missing in the post (or had possibly been tampered with in some fashion,) and that, therefore, the election should be regarded as void. There will then follow an immense amount of rabble rousing and litigation.
I think it's a double objective.
Primary - rig it to win.
Secondary - if that fails say it was rigged.
I think you're right, except maybe for the order.
Maybe, he realises that he doesn't want to be President; everyone is very mean, very unfair to him.
But more than that, he doesn't want to be a loser or a quitter. Self image and all that.
So, like the kind of kid who doesn't revise for an exam, postal confusion gives him an excuse.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
I'm assuming he wants to create chaos in the postal system so that he can blame it in the event that Biden wins. The general argument would be that the election was fundamentally flawed, that Trump would've won if a load of votes hadn't gone missing in the post (or had possibly been tampered with in some fashion,) and that, therefore, the election should be regarded as void. There will then follow an immense amount of rabble rousing and litigation.
What is the US equivalent of the electoral commission? I'm not saying they are amazing or have covered themselves in glory wrt targeting people they didn't like with unnecessary investigations, I trust them to ensure the election is free, fair and not subject to political interference when they do take place. How has the US not got an equivalent who just sits above partisan politics and gets stuff done.
CV deaths reported per day in the last few days, 20, 18, 11. So where is the second wave?
Waiting in the wings for when more vulnerable or not-exposed-yet people get exposed.
See the Spanish Flu pattern in Denmark for a possible pattern.
As a PHE stats bod told me last Jan/Feb ... small blip with return to school, then second wave in the winter when the immune systems are lower.
Nice casual reference to Spanish Flu there and the unspoken spectre of 50 million deaths. When we get to the spring and we haven’t suffered a health catastrophe, are people finally going to put this all into perspective?
I do have to thank Eadric for his early doomsdaying because it allowed me to make a six figure sum in the options market, as well as to warn everyone I know to buy some Andrex. But even his spiritual successor LadyG has a more balanced view of the pandemic now.
It’s serious, in fact very nasty indeed. And we still don’t have a full understanding of it. But it’s not Disease X and our ability to treat, understand the transmission mechanism and ability to properly shield the vulnerable is an order of magnitude better than it was. And with hindsight the indiscriminate lockdown of Q2 may well have been a net harm, even if social distancing and other such lighter measures have proved on balance sensible as we built our understanding.
Roll on the (imperfect) vaccine and public enquiries and let’s treat this as the warning sign and dress rehearsal for something that might come down the line that really does deserve to be spoke of in the same breath as Spanish Flu.
Um. I haven't made any casual references to anything - rather a precise comparison to a historical example of a mechanism that is analogous to our situation now, where a second wave was generated by exposure of so far unexposed fractions of the population, in answer to your question.
Perhaps go and read about it?
I explored the comparison through conversation with someone who has a 25 year career in public health in this country.
However I'm not sure about casual references to speculative £100k+ profits off the back of a situation which has caused 40k+ deaths so far in just this country. If I'd done that I probably wouldn't be talking about it now.
We already have 750k+ deaths in toto just in wave 1 so far, so I agree that yes it is very serious.
Since I'm personally on the shielding list since a nasty diagnosis during lockdown, I will be taking significant care until we have a vaccine. No house guests for probably another year.
I saw that graph where Copenhagen had bobbled along for the whole summer with ongoing cases (or, rather, ongoing excess deaths) before exploding again in the second winter. Our total lack of excess mortality seems to shoe we have got in a better position than them (although Spanish flu had a higher signal/noise in the death rates tbf), and contact tracing should help even with a more nuanced lockdown. So, I hope we're not going into the 1:3:1 pattern typical of earlier pandemic waves where the response is unchanged between waves.
The second is - just because a pandemic runs through summer, hits hot countries, etc, doesn't mean it's not seasonal - the Spanish flu type is unambiguously seasonal, yet it ran through the summer in Copenhagen. (in fact seasonal flu likes tropical jungle climates in addition to temperate winters).
That said if we keep R as low as we can we can delay and slow onset and genuinely flatten this next curve, I'd be hopeful that our 3x wave will be close or better than a 3x Germany wave, not a 3x UK wave. 25-30k excess deaths from COVID this winter, if the second wave does hit, would be a decent result.
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
In the primaries this year more Democrats voted postal as a proportion than Republicans AFAIK.
The irrelevant Republican primaries vs the contested Democratic ones?
There have been loads of state elections and Dems have voted by post far more than GOPers.
There was a NY special election which someone on here was touting as evidence that Trunp.was.doing great because it was a 30 point blow out for the GOP candidate. But after postal votes were counted it was only a 5 point win.
OK, so there is method in his madness.
I can’t help but feel though that even in this case it would be counter productive. What would be more likely to get Dems to vote in person than a fear their postal vote wouldn’t be counted?
Why would Trump be doing this when such information as we have suggests Republicans are more likely to vote by post?
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
In the primaries this year more Democrats voted postal as a proportion than Republicans AFAIK.
The irrelevant Republican primaries vs the contested Democratic ones?
Even though it was uncontested remarkably a lot of voters still vote. Indeed Trump got nearly as many total votes as Biden.
Trump: 18,100,729 Biden: 18,391,206
Of course the big difference is the losing votes Other GOP: 724,326 Other Democrat: 17,453,266
But still a considerable amount of votes were still cast in the GOP primary - and I believe mostly in person, whereas Democrat votes were I believe much more posted.
What is the US equivalent of the electoral commission? I'm not saying they are amazing or have covered themselves in glory wrt targeting people they didn't like with unnecessary investigations, I trust them to ensure the election is free, fair and not subject to political interference when they do take place. How has the US not got an equivalent who just sits above partisan politics and gets stuff done.
Doesn't each state have a Secretary of State position which covers electoral matters ?
Comments
They have had a succession of US correspondents who are determinedly naive.
I wish you a speedy recuperation.
I do have to thank Eadric for his early doomsdaying because it allowed me to make a six figure sum in the options market, as well as to warn everyone I know to buy some Andrex. But even his spiritual successor LadyG has a more balanced view of the pandemic now.
It’s serious, in fact very nasty indeed. And we still don’t have a full understanding of it. But it’s not Disease X and our ability to treat, understand the transmission mechanism and ability to properly shield the vulnerable is an order of magnitude better than it was. And with hindsight the indiscriminate lockdown of Q2 may well have been a net harm, even if social distancing and other such lighter measures have proved on balance sensible as we built our understanding.
Roll on the (imperfect) vaccine and public enquiries and let’s treat this as the warning sign and dress rehearsal for something that might come down the line that really does deserve to be spoke of in the same breath as Spanish Flu.
PPS The number of first time buyers was in 2019 I think at its highest since 2007.
Oh wait ...
What there often wasn't though was air con to keep the exam rooms cool.
Come to think of it I manage to do a day's work on a couple of teas and less than 500ml of water with only a trip or two to the toilet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_World_Snooker_Championship_final
That went down to the last pot. It finished at 12.23 am, having started 68 minutes earlier and the TV audience was 18.5 million.
And that was not to disparage 1985.
Snooker - bloody hell.
Surely not an attempt to get another handout or excuse to put up fees ?
BTW how were your results for A-level? Mine were in line with what I would have expected, but I was not involved in the predictions as the HoD did all of that and I don’t know which were marked down (although some were I know).
What time is Trump's tweet supporting Lakashenko due?
The daily glance at the morning US polls - FOX News has Biden up 49-42 and the NPR/PBS/Marist poll has Biden up 53-42.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/NPR_PBS-NewsHour_Marist-Poll_USA-NOS-and-TABLES_202008121039.pdf
The crosstabs are grim for Trump and the Republicans with Biden at 50% or more across the nation and leading in the South and Midwest comfortably.
The Fox News poll was discussed on here earlier and I can't find any meaningful crosstabs.
Trump's job approval ranges from -5 with Rasmussen to -15 with NPR/PBS/Marist.
As for Massachusetts, Trump lost by 27 last time and the latest poll puts him 33 behind Biden though a poll earlier in the week put the gap at 36 so all might not yet be lost for the President.
I’m already getting worried he’s going to win.
Colour TV licences became more common than B&W in 1977 but there were still 3 million out of 18 million by the mid-80s, so one in six were B&W only which is a decent proportion.
I'm not trying to be working class hero about it, by the way. We were very much middle class but just had a perfectly functional B&W set until the early 90s, then got a new colour one when it conked out.
PS. Possibly some of the three million were fiddling the system by using a colour set on a B&W licence, but not sure the rate of that was massive.
PPS. Watch TV quiz shows on Challenge from the 80s where the prize is described as a "COLOUR television" - it certainly wasn't a given that's what you'd be getting until the late 80s.
No idea what the GCSEs will be like though.
Edit - it was on BBC2. Every snooker fan should watch it. It was unbe-fucking-lievable.
Still a biggish ‘if’ at the moment though.
The way to do it is to drink copiously in the days before, to ensure you are fully hydrated.
Then on the day, just drink a little, and nothing closer than 2 hours before the exam.
You won't lose enough while in a sedentary position for a few hours to worry the metabolism. In any case, coping with dehydration is something we have evolved to do. You can be a couple of litres down with no ill effect.
(I ran the hottest ever London Marathon on no more than half a pint before the race, and most of what I picked up at the drinks stations went over my head. I was a bit hot and bothered at the end of the race but nothing a pint of bitter couldn't sort out).
Water paranoia is just a modern myth.
Personally think its BEST for anti-Trumpsky cause to NOT constantly be publicizing his attacks on democracy, in particular his claims re: fraud with election process.
Why? Because this plays into the Putinist vote suppression strategy - don't bother to vote, it's all rigged, your ballot will be lost in the mail, etc., etc. ad infinitum.
Note that is is NOT something Trumpsky dreamed up, GOP has been pumping this bidge on regular basis for some time. BUT leave it to The Donald to push the envelope as per usual with him.
He couldn’t win this match if O’Sullivan had a heart attack the way he’s playing.
They're also on the "no essential travel" list which means for most people travel insurance won't be valid.
After all, the New Zealand Labour Party is just about the only political party in the democratic world that's polling better than the SNP. There are solid reasons for this. I suspect that a very large fraction of the British electorate would thoroughly approve of a policy of total drawbridge raising, and making everyone who enters the country from outwith the British Isles spend a fortnight's enforced stay at a hotel near Heathrow Airport.
Edit - he may of course also conclude Lukashenko’s position is untenable but by upsetting him he can earn mega brownie points with ordinary Belorussians and their new president. It is the sort of game he’s played before.
https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1294342839162343426
It's true that it's a repeat of his 2016 stuff, but that is part of the Trump approach which you can't deny is happening, is real and important.
I suspect that a colour TV was a very aspirational thing in working class areas in the 1970s which would explain the game show emphasis.
Is he stupid, or is there something else going on?
You can say Trump aired a completely discredited racist conspiracy theory but you don't repeat what it actually is verbatim.
The media is going to fuck up reporting on Trump yet again. I bet there are a dozen journalist gagging to write the first "pivot to centre/today is the day Trump became President" piece of the election campaign as well.
Perhaps go and read about it?
I explored the comparison through conversation with someone who has a 25 year career in public health in this country.
However I'm not sure about casual references to speculative £100k+ profits off the back of a situation which has caused 40k+ deaths so far in just this country. If I'd done that I probably wouldn't be talking about it now.
We already have 750k+ deaths in toto just in wave 1 so far, so I agree that yes it is very serious.
Since I'm personally on the shielding list since a nasty diagnosis during lockdown, I will be taking significant care until we have a vaccine. No house guests for probably another year.
Those of us betting on POTUS should bear in mind what is happening to UPS under Trump.
The GOP leaders make me physically sick. Do they actually want to live in a democracy or not?
I am fed up with being told someone has said something "unacceptable" but I am not allowed to know what it is, so I can't form an opinion about whether it is, in fact, unacceptable, or someone is trying to infringe their freedom of speech.
Ford made the calculation that pardoning Nixon would do less damage to America than letting him stand trial. In this he was probably right. But it’s hard to make the same argument for Trump. The system of government withstood Nixon and brought him down. Trump has subverted and annihilated that system.
That's if all the voting stations aren't removed by GOP as well.
And I don't think that many will be going to see granny at weekends.
Unis are focusing on lectures online, but face to face for small groups where social distance will be more possible.
High speed internet in student houses is going to be crucial for the next year or so.
BBC R4 consumer strand have done a couple of programmes about it, and I personally know about two or three places.
So there is potential for relatively large amounts of transmission in that population in some isolation from other groups.
Not so sure about the section of the student population who are home-based.
You need to drink more on a hot day because you sweat more.
You are generally likely to drink more and piss less on a hot day.
One recent poll I saw had people intending to vote by post going 72% Biden whilst In Person voters went sixty-something percent for Trump.
Primary - rig it to win.
Secondary - if that fails say it was rigged.
There was a NY special election which someone on here was touting as evidence that Trunp.was.doing great because it was a 30 point blow out for the GOP candidate. But after postal votes were counted it was only a 5 point win.
Dems intending to vote by mail: 55%
GOP intending to vote by mail: 16%
Maybe, he realises that he doesn't want to be President; everyone is very mean, very unfair to him.
But more than that, he doesn't want to be a loser or a quitter. Self image and all that.
So, like the kind of kid who doesn't revise for an exam, postal confusion gives him an excuse.
But this is quality.
https://twitter.com/MailSport/status/1294352678814920706
https://thecritic.co.uk
The second is - just because a pandemic runs through summer, hits hot countries, etc, doesn't mean it's not seasonal - the Spanish flu type is unambiguously seasonal, yet it ran through the summer in Copenhagen. (in fact seasonal flu likes tropical jungle climates in addition to temperate winters).
That said if we keep R as low as we can we can delay and slow onset and genuinely flatten this next curve, I'd be hopeful that our 3x wave will be close or better than a 3x Germany wave, not a 3x UK wave. 25-30k excess deaths from COVID this winter, if the second wave does hit, would be a decent result.
I can’t help but feel though that even in this case it would be counter productive. What would be more likely to get Dems to vote in person than a fear their postal vote wouldn’t be counted?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQbyOjIrAIY
Trump: 18,100,729
Biden: 18,391,206
Of course the big difference is the losing votes
Other GOP: 724,326
Other Democrat: 17,453,266
But still a considerable amount of votes were still cast in the GOP primary - and I believe mostly in person, whereas Democrat votes were I believe much more posted.