In the face of such chaotic and incompetant government, what is keeping the Conservative poll ratings afloat is in my view the unfinished business of Brexit. Referencing the last YouGov poll, the leave vote is still very solidly behind Johnson (71% v 13% for Lab), the Tories are still further ahead of Labour with C2DEs than they are with ABC1s (9% v 4%) and over 65s are still rock solid for the Conservatives (62% v 21% Lab).
We have to accept that Brexit is still the defining political issue of our generation, strong enough to supersede normal political loyalties. It is still redefining those loyalties. However, I think that once the UK has left in 2021, Brexit will be regarded as a done deal and there will scope for a quite rapid shift of loyalties as people look to the future rather than the past. The political mood appears to be as febrile as it did in John Major's latter years, and without the Brexit support crutch the Conservatives will find themselves trailing in the polls.
I think somebody made the good point the other day that there is also the massive issue of Labour having elected Corbyn, and, even worse, come very close to having got him into power in 2017. Lots of voters who were frankly terrified of the prospect of him becoming Prime Minister, will take a lot of convincing that Labour might not do it again (obviously not Corbyn himself, but somebody of that ilk) but after they’ve actually got into power on a “moderate” platform. All it takes is a leadership challenge and a paltry amount of nominations from the Parliamentary party.
I don't think that more than a handful of the electorate might entertain that risible idea, excluding those whose perspective is clouded by the reality that they would never have voted Labour in a month of Sundays.
Actually it’s the one reason, IMO, that labour will remain unelectable. Until they throw out Corbyn and is following morons the have no chance even with past voters.
“We thought we were electing a Churchill and many of us believe, including myself, that this remains the case. But he has to believe in himself.”
Nobody thought we were electing a Churchill
I thought we were electing a shallow opportunist who would be overwhelmed by the job and bail out of its responsibilities.
It's not clear I was wrong. There may be great qualities of vision and leadership there, some integrity, a real strength of character and an implacable sense of purpose, but if so we await its unveiling.
In the face of such chaotic and incompetant government, what is keeping the Conservative poll ratings afloat is in my view the unfinished business of Brexit. Referencing the last YouGov poll, the leave vote is still very solidly behind Johnson (71% v 13% for Lab), the Tories are still further ahead of Labour with C2DEs than they are with ABC1s (9% v 4%) and over 65s are still rock solid for the Conservatives (62% v 21% Lab).
We have to accept that Brexit is still the defining political issue of our generation, strong enough to supersede normal political loyalties. It is still redefining those loyalties. However, I think that once the UK has left in 2021, Brexit will be regarded as a done deal and there will scope for a quite rapid shift of loyalties as people look to the future rather than the past. The political mood appears to be as febrile as it did in John Major's latter years, and without the Brexit support crutch the Conservatives will find themselves trailing in the polls.
I think somebody made the good point the other day that there is also the massive issue of Labour having elected Corbyn, and, even worse, come very close to having got him into power in 2017. Lots of voters who were frankly terrified of the prospect of him becoming Prime Minister, will take a lot of convincing that Labour might not do it again (obviously not Corbyn himself, but somebody of that ilk) but after they’ve actually got into power on a “moderate” platform. All it takes is a leadership challenge and a paltry amount of nominations from the Parliamentary party.
I don't think that more than a handful of the electorate might entertain that risible idea, excluding those whose perspective is clouded by the reality that they would never have voted Labour in a month of Sundays.
To challenge a Labour leader, the backing of 20% of the PLP is needed. Right now, that's 40 MPs. Were Labour to become the largest party it would need 50+. With a majority it would need over 60. In other words, it's not going to happen unless Labour is in electoral meltdown.
Back to Corona :-) This is something I have been cogitating for the last couple of weeks, and would like the opinion of NigelB or Foxy or anyone else with a better biology background than me.
In the last couple of months we have seen big increases in the number of cases of SARS-COV2 in some countries, but the level of severe illness is much lower than expected, as measured by hospitalisations and deaths. There was speculation in the spring that the virus would not spread as quickly in summer as colds and flu are strongly seasonal. But it seems that the spread of the SARS-COV2 virus has little to do with the season.
Is it at all plausible though, that these seasonal illness viruses still spread at a similar rate but less frequently appears as an illness? It is possible that the human body is under less stress in summer and more stress in winter, due to lots of reasons: not moving from cold to warm environments several times a day, not inhailing air under 10 degrees, generally getting more exercise, sunlight and fresh air etc. If the body or in particular the immune system is under more stress then an onslaught from a virus is more likely to develop into illness.
Is it plausible that catching the virus is just as easy in summer, but this developing into a serious disease is much lower in summer and higher in winter? For most other Rhino/Corona/Flu viruses there is as good as no testing of the prevelance of the virus in the general population, so we do not really appreciate how widley cold viruses are spread in summer, and only if the immune system is under some other kind of stress does this develop into a "summer cold" which are ususally not as heavy as a winter cold.
I am definitely not an expert, but my impression is that there’s no such simple answer. As far as the present coronavirus is concerned, by far the largest statistical effects are the massive increase in testing, which is picking up a far greater proportion of those infected but suffering only mild or no symptoms, and the change in age profile of those infected, with a much larger proportion of younger people (the second, of course, may be to some extent an artefact of the first). There are definitely seasonal effects - increase in summer vitamin D levels; better ventilation as people leave windows open; more outdoor activity - but COVID doesn’t seem to be a seasonal disease in the same way flu certainly is (though even that varies across the globe).
In short, it’s complicated, and there isn’t a strong scientific consensus.
...And as far as rhonivuruses are concerned, you might well be closer to the mark.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
*hold my turnip*
Better scenery in Ayrshire than Devon? Away with yer....
I had an interesting email the other day from a large defence contractor trying to headhunt me. I’m in a shortage area of engineering so I get these from time to time. However, what’s interesting is that the recruiter explicitly played up the WFH aspect. Last time I worked in defence trying to WFH was a nearly implausible nightmare. I think if major security restricted firms are now openly advertising roles as WFH friendly this might be here to stay. I’ve actually been surprised how much engineering I was able to do from home (although my role is fieldwork heavy so it’s not been perfect).
So this is the other angle: The people who used to work from the office might be expected to go back, but people who are getting hired now are getting hired at least on the basis of WFH for now, and potentially on the basis of WFH forever. Even in the "WFH for now" case this is going to be quite hard to reverse unless the employee is enthusiastic about it, and the path of least resistance will be to carry on the same.
Without commuters paying peak fares – particularly into London – then it’s hard to see how the sector could survive without serious cuts, given that significantly increased subsidies are likely to be off the table for a government that will need to rein in its budget deficit.
The government has something of a problem. Usage of National Rail is about a 1/3 of what it normally is:
Passengers pay c.£10 billion a year. Let's assume that those travelling at the moment are paying quite a lot less than the normal average (i.e. no one will buy a first class ticket, those travelling are probably more local, fewer tickets purchased for business use). Let's say that the government is getting around £2 billion a year (and we're assuming that August usage is maintained - it might be propped up by a higher share of leisure travel).
So as David says, the subsidy goes from £4.5 billion a year to £12.5 billion a year. But what can the government do other than pay it? The people using the trains are people who have to go to work. They are key workers. There would be a huge backlash if the government starts cutting services.
Oh, and one other thing. HS2. How can the government justify ploughing on with that whilst closing existing railways? They can't.
The Government can save some money by reducing the frequency of services, particularly at peak times - indeed, if we arrive in a situation where flexible working means that the remaining passenger journeys are much more spread out during the day, then I can see the entire peak/off-peak divide being tossed in the dustbin.
Certainly it's going to take a couple of years for such changes to come into effect: all those who had to endure the great TSGN timetabling disaster of 2018 will be all too acutely aware of the need to manage these things properly. But it must surely happen?
As for HS2, I think the London to Birmingham section will end up being built in full, for several reasons. Firstly, it's already underway so this Government has to deal with it (whereas the branches to the North can be placed under review and booted into the long grass for the next Prime Minister to worry about.) Secondly, it's being used as much as a means to dole out contracts to the construction industry and maintain and develop skills as it is to build infrastructure, and this arguably becomes a greater priority for Government during a recession. Thirdly, there will be the usual concerns about sunk costs involved in abandoning any partially completed project. Finally, the Tory West Midlands metro-mayor is an enthusiast for the scheme and is up for re-election next May.
However, I seriously doubt if the remainder of HS2 will ever get built.
And that leaves Johnson's levelling up with the North in tatters.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
As a Northerner by birth, and Midlander by choice, I don't think many Northern and Midland towns would score very highly on those criteria. I like Leicester, and am not planning to move away, but it is not a tourist hotspot for a reason.
That may be being unnecessarily pessimistic about parts outside the Greater South East. London is hugely expensive and much of it is a complete shithole. There are plenty of nice places to live in the Home Counties but they're also very costly to buy into.
There is a reason why we hear reports of estate agents in Manchester getting a lot of enquiries from worried Hongkongers with BN(O) passports. They are not stupid and know a good deal when they see one.
My guess is that places on a train line within 60-90 minutes of London will see a surge of interest from younger people looking to start families/get on the property ladder who will end up doing one or two days a week down at HQ and the rest WFH. Some of our lot are looking at this right now. The political consequences of changing demographics in such places will be interesting.
It will. Fast forward ten or twenty years and we may find that great swathes of the South-East will have become marginals or fallen to Labour, whilst the Conservatives will have wiped Labour out in much of what's left of its former Northern strongholds.
If we had enough constituency level demographic data then it would probably be possible to accurately predict the outcome in the bulk of seats by plugging a few numbers into a formula: the percentage of voters from various ethnic minority groups, the median age of the electorate, the percentage of voters identifying primarily as British, and the percentage of voters who have a university degree. It's entirely possible that future General Elections will see Labour swapping seats in County Durham for others in Surrey.
I'm not so sure about this. Young people become more conservative as they get older, and their values can evolve too. They will become more concerned about car and home ownership and family responsibilities and conserving the look and feel of their local areas.
Remember: the radical flower-power hippies of the 1960s are the ultra-Boomers of today.
That doesn't map to France where the radical students of the 60s are now far more left wing than the general population.
The flower power hippies were a tiny proportion of the population.
Are they? French people in their 60s and 70s are far more left wing? I can see they prefer Macron to Le Pen more but are they just more 'conservative" because Macron and the current social welfare system works for them, and they fear Le Pen would be too revolutionary?
Of course hippies were a tiny percentage of the population but social attitudes changed massively in the 60s amongst that generation and not many were voting Tory at the time.
Melenchon (not to self check spelling) was the choice of the oldies in France.
Edit: I might be talking total cock here. Ignore.
Hippie attitudes were increasingly widespread until the mid-70's. There then followed changes in popular culture that came before the political ones of Thatcherism.
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
Where do you buy your ingredients for the sandwich and the fruit? From shops in your market town whereas before you would not have needed to buy lunch for the week from there as you would have bought lunch in the city centre
It all gets delivered. Riverford, Able and Cole, Fresh Farm Deliveries and now Waitrose. I have not set foot in a grocery store since the first week of March.
If anyone has felt disrespected by my calling them mate I do apologise and if you let me know what you'd prefer to be called, please do so and I will listen.
It's only fair if I wish to be called Horse - as I've explained before Mr makes me feel like you're putting me above yourself and I'm below most of you in knowledge and experience - that I call you by your preferred name.
Mr. Dancer appears to have adopted (for reasons best known to himself) the modes of address of the Victorians. I don’t believe he’s trying to disrespect you or anyone else.
Eschewing use of the quote button is part and parcel of that.
One can quite see why. He'd need to employ a clerk to write out all the previous postings in copperplate on legal paper.
If anyone has felt disrespected by my calling them mate I do apologise and if you let me know what you'd prefer to be called, please do so and I will listen.
It's only fair if I wish to be called Horse - as I've explained before Mr makes me feel like you're putting me above yourself and I'm below most of you in knowledge and experience - that I call you by your preferred name.
Mr. Dancer appears to have adopted (for reasons best known to himself) the modes of address of the Victorians. I don’t believe he’s trying to disrespect you or anyone else.
Eschewing use of the quote button is part and parcel of that.
It's because he's actually a 19th century time traveller.
Though if anyone had adopted the overlong and convoluted sentencing structure of a victorian, albeit without the vocabulary, I'd have put money on it being me.
If anyone has felt disrespected by my calling them mate I do apologise and if you let me know what you'd prefer to be called, please do so and I will listen.
It's only fair if I wish to be called Horse - as I've explained before Mr makes me feel like you're putting me above yourself and I'm below most of you in knowledge and experience - that I call you by your preferred name.
If we all just refer to each other as 'Comrade' then I'm sure that will not upset anyone, comrade.
Off topic, this is an article about the terrifying Straw Hat Riots in New York in 1922. Fortunately America has calmed down noticeably since, at least where men's fashion is concerned.
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
Where do you buy your ingredients for the sandwich and the fruit? From shops in your market town whereas before you would not have needed to buy lunch for the week from there as you would have bought lunch in the city centre
It all gets delivered. Riverford, Able and Cole, Fresh Farm Deliveries and now Waitrose. I have not set foot in a grocery store since the first week of March.
And even the delivery drivers will be closer to your market town where you live than the city centre and probably the warehouse they come from too
Back to Corona :-) This is something I have been cogitating for the last couple of weeks, and would like the opinion of NigelB or Foxy or anyone else with a better biology background than me.
In the last couple of months we have seen big increases in the number of cases of SARS-COV2 in some countries, but the level of severe illness is much lower than expected, as measured by hospitalisations and deaths. There was speculation in the spring that the virus would not spread as quickly in summer as colds and flu are strongly seasonal. But it seems that the spread of the SARS-COV2 virus has little to do with the season.
Is it at all plausible though, that these seasonal illness viruses still spread at a similar rate but less frequently appears as an illness? It is possible that the human body is under less stress in summer and more stress in winter, due to lots of reasons: not moving from cold to warm environments several times a day, not inhailing air under 10 degrees, generally getting more exercise, sunlight and fresh air etc. If the body or in particular the immune system is under more stress then an onslaught from a virus is more likely to develop into illness.
Is it plausible that catching the virus is just as easy in summer, but this developing into a serious disease is much lower in summer and higher in winter? For most other Rhino/Corona/Flu viruses there is as good as no testing of the prevelance of the virus in the general population, so we do not really appreciate how widley cold viruses are spread in summer, and only if the immune system is under some other kind of stress does this develop into a "summer cold" which are ususally not as heavy as a winter cold.
I am definitely not an expert, but my impression is that there’s no such simple answer. As far as the present coronavirus is concerned, by far the largest statistical effects are the massive increase in testing, which is picking up a far greater proportion of those infected but suffering only mild or no symptoms, and the change in age profile of those infected, with a much larger proportion of younger people (the second, of course, may be to some extent an artefact of the first). There are definitely seasonal effects - increase in summer vitamin D levels; better ventilation as people leave windows open; more outdoor activity - but COVID doesn’t seem to be a seasonal disease in the same way flu certainly is (though even that varies across the globe).
In short, it’s complicated, and there isn’t a strong scientific consensus.
...And as far as rhonivuruses are concerned, you might well be closer to the mark.
Thanks for your thoughts. It's clear that the whole story is going to comprise of many different effects. Getting a good understanding of the different components and how the interact is really imporant.
Off topic, this is an article about the terrifying Straw Hat Riots in New York in 1922. Fortunately America has calmed down noticeably since, at least where men's fashion is concerned.
I went through a bit of a rockabilly phase n the 80s, dressing formally meant wearing a zoot suit, massive key chain and everything. Read up a bit on the Zoot Suit Riots at the time.
About the only good thing about the execrable Penny Dreadful: City of Angels is the depiction of said period.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
Your post on this is as accurate as all your others. I spent the worst year-and-a-half of my life in Scotland, depressed that I had to wear a coat in August.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
Where do you buy your ingredients for the sandwich and the fruit? From shops in your market town whereas before you would not have needed to buy lunch for the week from there as you would have bought lunch in the city centre
Off topic, this is an article about the terrifying Straw Hat Riots in New York in 1922. Fortunately America has calmed down noticeably since, at least where men's fashion is concerned.
I had an interesting email the other day from a large defence contractor trying to headhunt me. I’m in a shortage area of engineering so I get these from time to time. However, what’s interesting is that the recruiter explicitly played up the WFH aspect. Last time I worked in defence trying to WFH was a nearly implausible nightmare. I think if major security restricted firms are now openly advertising roles as WFH friendly this might be here to stay. I’ve actually been surprised how much engineering I was able to do from home (although my role is fieldwork heavy so it’s not been perfect).
So this is the other angle: The people who used to work from the office might be expected to go back, but people who are getting hired now are getting hired at least on the basis of WFH for now, and potentially on the basis of WFH forever. Even in the "WFH for now" case this is going to be quite hard to reverse unless the employee is enthusiastic about it, and the path of least resistance will be to carry on the same.
People will get fed up with WFH eventually.
I have done it for 20 years now and love it.
Just recording rare agreement with malcolmg. Always worked from home, clocked up 40 years now; wouldn't want it otherwise.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
Your post on this is as accurate as all your others. I spent the worst year-and-a-half of my life in Scotland, depressed that I had to wear a coat in August.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
12 degC at the moment here - windy too so feels like 9-10.
But low humidity, so considering whether to carry on with painting the shed rather than reading PB.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
Without commuters paying peak fares – particularly into London – then it’s hard to see how the sector could survive without serious cuts, given that significantly increased subsidies are likely to be off the table for a government that will need to rein in its budget deficit.
The government has something of a problem. Usage of National Rail is about a 1/3 of what it normally is:
Passengers pay c.£10 billion a year. Let's assume that those travelling at the moment are paying quite a lot less than the normal average (i.e. no one will buy a first class ticket, those travelling are probably more local, fewer tickets purchased for business use). Let's say that the government is getting around £2 billion a year (and we're assuming that August usage is maintained - it might be propped up by a higher share of leisure travel).
So as David says, the subsidy goes from £4.5 billion a year to £12.5 billion a year. But what can the government do other than pay it? The people using the trains are people who have to go to work. They are key workers. There would be a huge backlash if the government starts cutting services.
Oh, and one other thing. HS2. How can the government justify ploughing on with that whilst closing existing railways? They can't.
The Government can save some money by reducing the frequency of services, particularly at peak times - indeed, if we arrive in a situation where flexible working means that the remaining passenger journeys are much more spread out during the day, then I can see the entire peak/off-peak divide being tossed in the dustbin.
Certainly it's going to take a couple of years for such changes to come into effect: all those who had to endure the great TSGN timetabling disaster of 2018 will be all too acutely aware of the need to manage these things properly. But it must surely happen?
As for HS2, I think the London to Birmingham section will end up being built in full, for several reasons. Firstly, it's already underway so this Government has to deal with it (whereas the branches to the North can be placed under review and booted into the long grass for the next Prime Minister to worry about.) Secondly, it's being used as much as a means to dole out contracts to the construction industry and maintain and develop skills as it is to build infrastructure, and this arguably becomes a greater priority for Government during a recession. Thirdly, there will be the usual concerns about sunk costs involved in abandoning any partially completed project. Finally, the Tory West Midlands metro-mayor is an enthusiast for the scheme and is up for re-election next May.
However, I seriously doubt if the remainder of HS2 will ever get built.
And that leaves Johnson's levelling up with the North in tatters.
Yes and Scotland yet again paying for London infrastructure from its fabled London deficit
What’s your GERS deficit and government spending per head again?
In what is either a remarkable coincidence or operating on some mysterious algorithm, the Straw Hat Riots article is linked to from this other rather interesting little piece about what the author claims is the only unclaimed territory on earth, a desolate bit of land between Egypt and Sudan neither cares to claim.
If anyone has felt disrespected by my calling them mate I do apologise and if you let me know what you'd prefer to be called, please do so and I will listen.
It's only fair if I wish to be called Horse - as I've explained before Mr makes me feel like you're putting me above yourself and I'm below most of you in knowledge and experience - that I call you by your preferred name.
Hopefully all our anti maskers and this is all a hoax brigade are off in Trafalgar Square giving us some peace, hope they don’t all infect each other and boost the second peak.
“We thought we were electing a Churchill and many of us believe, including myself, that this remains the case. But he has to believe in himself.”
Nobody thought we were electing a Churchill
I thought we were electing a shallow opportunist who would be overwhelmed by the job and bail out of its responsibilities.
It's not clear I was wrong. There may be great qualities of vision and leadership there, some integrity, a real strength of character and an implacable sense of purpose, but if so we await its unveiling.
Your second paragraph was superflous, your first described perfectly what was on offer.
Hopefully all our anti maskers and this is all a hoax brigade are off in Trafalgar Square giving us some peace, hope they don’t all infect each other and boost the second peak.
In the face of such chaotic and incompetant government, what is keeping the Conservative poll ratings afloat is in my view the unfinished business of Brexit. Referencing the last YouGov poll, the leave vote is still very solidly behind Johnson (71% v 13% for Lab), the Tories are still further ahead of Labour with C2DEs than they are with ABC1s (9% v 4%) and over 65s are still rock solid for the Conservatives (62% v 21% Lab).
We have to accept that Brexit is still the defining political issue of our generation, strong enough to supersede normal political loyalties. It is still redefining those loyalties. However, I think that once the UK has left in 2021, Brexit will be regarded as a done deal and there will scope for a quite rapid shift of loyalties as people look to the future rather than the past. The political mood appears to be as febrile as it did in John Major's latter years, and without the Brexit support crutch the Conservatives will find themselves trailing in the polls.
I think somebody made the good point the other day that there is also the massive issue of Labour having elected Corbyn, and, even worse, come very close to having got him into power in 2017. Lots of voters who were frankly terrified of the prospect of him becoming Prime Minister, will take a lot of convincing that Labour might not do it again (obviously not Corbyn himself, but somebody of that ilk) but after they’ve actually got into power on a “moderate” platform. All it takes is a leadership challenge and a paltry amount of nominations from the Parliamentary party.
I don't think that more than a handful of the electorate might entertain that risible idea, excluding those whose perspective is clouded by the reality that they would never have voted Labour in a month of Sundays.
Actually it’s the one reason, IMO, that labour will remain unelectable. Until they throw out Corbyn and is following morons the have no chance even with past voters.
Why was Labour ahead in the polls as recently as Spring 2019 with Corbyn still in charge?
In the face of such chaotic and incompetant government, what is keeping the Conservative poll ratings afloat is in my view the unfinished business of Brexit. Referencing the last YouGov poll, the leave vote is still very solidly behind Johnson (71% v 13% for Lab), the Tories are still further ahead of Labour with C2DEs than they are with ABC1s (9% v 4%) and over 65s are still rock solid for the Conservatives (62% v 21% Lab).
We have to accept that Brexit is still the defining political issue of our generation, strong enough to supersede normal political loyalties. It is still redefining those loyalties. However, I think that once the UK has left in 2021, Brexit will be regarded as a done deal and there will scope for a quite rapid shift of loyalties as people look to the future rather than the past. The political mood appears to be as febrile as it did in John Major's latter years, and without the Brexit support crutch the Conservatives will find themselves trailing in the polls.
I think somebody made the good point the other day that there is also the massive issue of Labour having elected Corbyn, and, even worse, come very close to having got him into power in 2017. Lots of voters who were frankly terrified of the prospect of him becoming Prime Minister, will take a lot of convincing that Labour might not do it again (obviously not Corbyn himself, but somebody of that ilk) but after they’ve actually got into power on a “moderate” platform. All it takes is a leadership challenge and a paltry amount of nominations from the Parliamentary party.
I don't think that more than a handful of the electorate might entertain that risible idea, excluding those whose perspective is clouded by the reality that they would never have voted Labour in a month of Sundays.
Actually it’s the one reason, IMO, that labour will remain unelectable. Until they throw out Corbyn and is following morons the have no chance even with past voters.
Why was Labour ahead in the polls as recently as Spring 2019 with Corbyn still in charge?
Hmm, as one of the tweets says, no attempt to get a quote from the Hobbits and Elves side.
LOL, a lot of winners in that team, political giants, bet SNP are wetting their pants from laughing too much. Invisible Jack , Gypsy Ross and no mention of Gollum Gove, or Baroness the Mooth
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
Your post on this is as accurate as all your others. I spent the worst year-and-a-half of my life in Scotland, depressed that I had to wear a coat in August.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
12 degC at the moment here - windy too so feels like 9-10.
But low humidity, so considering whether to carry on with painting the shed rather than reading PB.
I checked the BBC weather forecast earlier. Overcast but dry, so I hung the laundry out. Now raining.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
I always say that most people work 24/7. That's 24 minutes per hour, 7 hours a day.
Without commuters paying peak fares – particularly into London – then it’s hard to see how the sector could survive without serious cuts, given that significantly increased subsidies are likely to be off the table for a government that will need to rein in its budget deficit.
The government has something of a problem. Usage of National Rail is about a 1/3 of what it normally is:
Passengers pay c.£10 billion a year. Let's assume that those travelling at the moment are paying quite a lot less than the normal average (i.e. no one will buy a first class ticket, those travelling are probably more local, fewer tickets purchased for business use). Let's say that the government is getting around £2 billion a year (and we're assuming that August usage is maintained - it might be propped up by a higher share of leisure travel).
So as David says, the subsidy goes from £4.5 billion a year to £12.5 billion a year. But what can the government do other than pay it? The people using the trains are people who have to go to work. They are key workers. There would be a huge backlash if the government starts cutting services.
Oh, and one other thing. HS2. How can the government justify ploughing on with that whilst closing existing railways? They can't.
The Government can save some money by reducing the frequency of services, particularly at peak times - indeed, if we arrive in a situation where flexible working means that the remaining passenger journeys are much more spread out during the day, then I can see the entire peak/off-peak divide being tossed in the dustbin.
Certainly it's going to take a couple of years for such changes to come into effect: all those who had to endure the great TSGN timetabling disaster of 2018 will be all too acutely aware of the need to manage these things properly. But it must surely happen?
As for HS2, I think the London to Birmingham section will end up being built in full, for several reasons. Firstly, it's already underway so this Government has to deal with it (whereas the branches to the North can be placed under review and booted into the long grass for the next Prime Minister to worry about.) Secondly, it's being used as much as a means to dole out contracts to the construction industry and maintain and develop skills as it is to build infrastructure, and this arguably becomes a greater priority for Government during a recession. Thirdly, there will be the usual concerns about sunk costs involved in abandoning any partially completed project. Finally, the Tory West Midlands metro-mayor is an enthusiast for the scheme and is up for re-election next May.
However, I seriously doubt if the remainder of HS2 will ever get built.
And that leaves Johnson's levelling up with the North in tatters.
Yes and Scotland yet again paying for London infrastructure from its fabled London deficit
What’s your GERS deficit and government spending per head again?
Tired unionist rhetoric on fake unionist estimates , 166 estimates in the fake GERS, UK numbers. If the best London can do with lakes of oil for 40 years is to have us with a deficit , based on London spending given Scotland runs a zero deficit, makes me laugh. What do they squander all their deficit on again, can you explain it. Any link to what UK spend the 30+ billion ,they claim, on.
Back to Corona :-) This is something I have been cogitating for the last couple of weeks, and would like the opinion of NigelB or Foxy or anyone else with a better biology background than me.
In the last couple of months we have seen big increases in the number of cases of SARS-COV2 in some countries, but the level of severe illness is much lower than expected, as measured by hospitalisations and deaths. There was speculation in the spring that the virus would not spread as quickly in summer as colds and flu are strongly seasonal. But it seems that the spread of the SARS-COV2 virus has little to do with the season.
Is it at all plausible though, that these seasonal illness viruses still spread at a similar rate but less frequently appears as an illness? It is possible that the human body is under less stress in summer and more stress in winter, due to lots of reasons: not moving from cold to warm environments several times a day, not inhailing air under 10 degrees, generally getting more exercise, sunlight and fresh air etc. If the body or in particular the immune system is under more stress then an onslaught from a virus is more likely to develop into illness.
Is it plausible that catching the virus is just as easy in summer, but this developing into a serious disease is much lower in summer and higher in winter? For most other Rhino/Corona/Flu viruses there is as good as no testing of the prevelance of the virus in the general population, so we do not really appreciate how widley cold viruses are spread in summer, and only if the immune system is under some other kind of stress does this develop into a "summer cold" which are ususally not as heavy as a winter cold.
I'm nowhere near an expert, but can't it be explained by the age profile of those infected being significantly younger, and nothing to do with transmission is summer vs. winter?
The reduction in fatality rate may be caused by the death of what is bleakly called 'dry tinder' in the spring/early summer. Frail, very old, major complications, often in care homes and so on. To be blunt they possibly only had months to live. Obviously not very nice to think in these stark terms, but it may be the medical reality.
Not very accurate though. The actuaries believe that the mean loss of years of Covid-19 victims was 10 years. Certainly my seventy something friend who died in March was otherwise well and could have expected a decade or more with her grandchildren.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
Your post on this is as accurate as all your others. I spent the worst year-and-a-half of my life in Scotland, depressed that I had to wear a coat in August.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
You are a lying arsehole or the wimpiest jessieboy going. Assume you prefer stacking shelves down south to stacking shelves in Tesco Scotland.
“We thought we were electing a Churchill and many of us believe, including myself, that this remains the case. But he has to believe in himself.”
Nobody thought we were electing a Churchill
I thought we were electing a shallow opportunist who would be overwhelmed by the job and bail out of its responsibilities.
It's not clear I was wrong. There may be great qualities of vision and leadership there, some integrity, a real strength of character and an implacable sense of purpose, but if so we await its unveiling.
Your second paragraph was superflous, your first described perfectly what was on offer.
Nonsense. If there really is a WFH revolution, cities and towns won't be competing on proximity to London anymore, it will be on crime, livability, beauty, amenities, surrounding countryside, airports, and price. That will level up the North.
I agree, though people might also start thinking about the weather as well, in which case Scotland and the north are screwed.
*gloriously sunny Devon gives a big smug wave*
Weather in Scotland is just fine and you can have a much better lifestyle, better scenery , more countryside , golf , etc. Fishing has obviously never been to Scotland.
Your post on this is as accurate as all your others. I spent the worst year-and-a-half of my life in Scotland, depressed that I had to wear a coat in August.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
12 degC at the moment here - windy too so feels like 9-10.
But low humidity, so considering whether to carry on with painting the shed rather than reading PB.
lovely and sunny on west coast , sitting in garden relaxing and reading the pathetic wittering of some of the pathetic halfwits on here, sans coat as well.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
One of the other challenges we face is that we don't have large houses. Two people working from home with kids in fairly cramped conditions - certainly true for many of my generation - is no picnic. However it should be up to employers to decide what works best not the government and it's newfound thirst for central planning.
Should it be up to employers? It sounds reasonable but suppose that accidentally adds a degree of institutional racism is it still a good idea?
But perhaps different unintended consequences will cancel each other out. The preference for large homes discriminates against urban workers but the need for fast broadband works against folk in big houses out in the sticks.
In what is either a remarkable coincidence or operating on some mysterious algorithm, the Straw Hat Riots article is linked to from this other rather interesting little piece about what the author claims is the only unclaimed territory on earth, a desolate bit of land between Egypt and Sudan neither cares to claim.
Pic 14 of the Madison Square Garden rally wouldn't look out of place for an event organised by a current US demagogue. Possibly a little too understated if anything.
Back to Corona :-) This is something I have been cogitating for the last couple of weeks, and would like the opinion of NigelB or Foxy or anyone else with a better biology background than me.
In the last couple of months we have seen big increases in the number of cases of SARS-COV2 in some countries, but the level of severe illness is much lower than expected, as measured by hospitalisations and deaths. There was speculation in the spring that the virus would not spread as quickly in summer as colds and flu are strongly seasonal. But it seems that the spread of the SARS-COV2 virus has little to do with the season.
Is it at all plausible though, that these seasonal illness viruses still spread at a similar rate but less frequently appears as an illness? It is possible that the human body is under less stress in summer and more stress in winter, due to lots of reasons: not moving from cold to warm environments several times a day, not inhailing air under 10 degrees, generally getting more exercise, sunlight and fresh air etc. If the body or in particular the immune system is under more stress then an onslaught from a virus is more likely to develop into illness.
Is it plausible that catching the virus is just as easy in summer, but this developing into a serious disease is much lower in summer and higher in winter? For most other Rhino/Corona/Flu viruses there is as good as no testing of the prevelance of the virus in the general population, so we do not really appreciate how widley cold viruses are spread in summer, and only if the immune system is under some other kind of stress does this develop into a "summer cold" which are ususally not as heavy as a winter cold.
I'm nowhere near an expert, but can't it be explained by the age profile of those infected being significantly younger, and nothing to do with transmission is summer vs. winter?
The reduction in fatality rate may be caused by the death of what is bleakly called 'dry tinder' in the spring/early summer. Frail, very old, major complications, often in care homes and so on. To be blunt they possibly only had months to live. Obviously not very nice to think in these stark terms, but it may be the medical reality.
Not very accurate though. The actuaries believe that the mean loss of years of Covid-19 victims was 10 years. Certainly my seventy something friend who died in March was otherwise well and could have expected a decade or more with her grandchildren.
Should people on chemo have the flu vaccine and the corona one when it’s available or is it an individual thing?
It has surely become clear by now to anyone with critical faculties that the single halfway respectable argument for Boris Johnson as PM is the purely negative counterfactual that the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn.
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
Where do you buy your ingredients for the sandwich and the fruit? From shops in your market town whereas before you would not have needed to buy lunch for the week from there as you would have bought lunch in the city centre
Tesco
Your market town Tesco, not the city centre Tesco
Well I live within the Newcastle city limits. Not exactly a “market town”.
Pret made a third of its workforce redundant. From what I have seen so many of its workforce are the very same migrants the government wants rid of - so whats the problem?
Ah yes. The real problem. So many of the friends of the Conservative Party own vast property portfolios. Big business suddenly has realised it doesn't need a big expensive office. Which collapses demand and with it values. This is Bad News for the friends of the party. So fuck the virus get everyone back into the office. Says Grant Shapps. From Home.
Companies will still need office space. They will be smaller and more flexible. Suspect many will also utilise regional hubs. People will still meet face to face - just less often. The economics of forcing people to waste money and productive time travelling to do something they can do without travelling is no longer viable. The restructuring of our economy offers plenty of commercial opportunities if you think about it, and the more profitable use of time and the more profitable use of money not being spaffed up against the wall in pointless commuting and twatty coffee will be a gain.
Tell the oligarchs to do one.
Your prejudices are showing
The government is shitting themselves about the loss of jobs, loss of tax revenues, impact on pension funds (the biggest owners of commercial property) and the need to avoid the hollowing out of big cities. Oligarchs don’t really figure highly.
It's not going to happen,not in its current form at the least.
I take it 'algorithm' is a euphemism for 'Dominic Cummings'.
"What we've got here Prime Minister is an algorithm messing things up. A complete algorithm. An arrogant, close minded algorithm that doesn't work in practice and isn't as clever as it seems. And when you have an algorithm messing things about, you need to sack that algorithm, I mean change the algorithm, even if that algorithm worked well on something else. Do you catch my drift, Prime Minister?"
"I absolutely do. Dominic will sort it out for you. What do you think? He's the best at advice"
"Tí eúkolon? Tò állōi hypotíthesthai. Prime Minister"
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
Pret made a third of its workforce redundant. From what I have seen so many of its workforce are the very same migrants the government wants rid of - so whats the problem?
Ah yes. The real problem. So many of the friends of the Conservative Party own vast property portfolios. Big business suddenly has realised it doesn't need a big expensive office. Which collapses demand and with it values. This is Bad News for the friends of the party. So fuck the virus get everyone back into the office. Says Grant Shapps. From Home.
Companies will still need office space. They will be smaller and more flexible. Suspect many will also utilise regional hubs. People will still meet face to face - just less often. The economics of forcing people to waste money and productive time travelling to do something they can do without travelling is no longer viable. The restructuring of our economy offers plenty of commercial opportunities if you think about it, and the more profitable use of time and the more profitable use of money not being spaffed up against the wall in pointless commuting and twatty coffee will be a gain.
Tell the oligarchs to do one.
Maybe there's a niche in the market for cheap, close to home drop-in work spaces that can be walked/cycled to? They'd need very good internet capability - and be secure too - but you could still have a degree of interaction with people from different work disciplines, common provision of services such as a food etc. Get out the house, but pay far less than commuting costs whilst not being stuck in your home environment.
You could call it...a pub.
My sister has been investing in those for me over the last 3 years... 🙂
Pret made a third of its workforce redundant. From what I have seen so many of its workforce are the very same migrants the government wants rid of - so whats the problem?
Ah yes. The real problem. So many of the friends of the Conservative Party own vast property portfolios. Big business suddenly has realised it doesn't need a big expensive office. Which collapses demand and with it values. This is Bad News for the friends of the party. So fuck the virus get everyone back into the office. Says Grant Shapps. From Home.
Companies will still need office space. They will be smaller and more flexible. Suspect many will also utilise regional hubs. People will still meet face to face - just less often. The economics of forcing people to waste money and productive time travelling to do something they can do without travelling is no longer viable. The restructuring of our economy offers plenty of commercial opportunities if you think about it, and the more profitable use of time and the more profitable use of money not being spaffed up against the wall in pointless commuting and twatty coffee will be a gain.
Tell the oligarchs to do one.
Your prejudices are showing
The government is shitting themselves about the loss of jobs, loss of tax revenues, impact on pension funds (the biggest owners of commercial property) and the need to avoid the hollowing out of big cities. Oligarchs don’t really figure highly.
Im generally quite happy to have a go at oligarchs but have to agree that the govts motivation is simply the tax base and jobs.
Whilst govts shouldnt be luddites swimming against the technological tide they absolutely should try to manage and slow down the transition from the status quo economy to whatever the new one becomes.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
I go out for my lunch hour now as its nice to get out and get some fresh air. I go sit in a cafe outdoors have a coffee, a leisurely meal watch the world go buy and still spend half the amount I would have spent on the commute.
Back in the office days it was instant coffee from the kettle and a packed lunch eaten at my desk as commute money eat to much of my living on money.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
Yeah, well, work martyrs are another of my pet hates. My menagerie is bursting!
In the face of such chaotic and incompetant government, what is keeping the Conservative poll ratings afloat is in my view the unfinished business of Brexit. Referencing the last YouGov poll, the leave vote is still very solidly behind Johnson (71% v 13% for Lab), the Tories are still further ahead of Labour with C2DEs than they are with ABC1s (9% v 4%) and over 65s are still rock solid for the Conservatives (62% v 21% Lab).
We have to accept that Brexit is still the defining political issue of our generation, strong enough to supersede normal political loyalties. It is still redefining those loyalties. However, I think that once the UK has left in 2021, Brexit will be regarded as a done deal and there will scope for a quite rapid shift of loyalties as people look to the future rather than the past. The political mood appears to be as febrile as it did in John Major's latter years, and without the Brexit support crutch the Conservatives will find themselves trailing in the polls.
I think somebody made the good point the other day that there is also the massive issue of Labour having elected Corbyn, and, even worse, come very close to having got him into power in 2017. Lots of voters who were frankly terrified of the prospect of him becoming Prime Minister, will take a lot of convincing that Labour might not do it again (obviously not Corbyn himself, but somebody of that ilk) but after they’ve actually got into power on a “moderate” platform. All it takes is a leadership challenge and a paltry amount of nominations from the Parliamentary party.
I don't think that more than a handful of the electorate might entertain that risible idea, excluding those whose perspective is clouded by the reality that they would never have voted Labour in a month of Sundays.
Actually it’s the one reason, IMO, that labour will remain unelectable. Until they throw out Corbyn and is following morons the have no chance even with past voters.
Why was Labour ahead in the polls as recently as Spring 2019 with Corbyn still in charge?
Because last year with four parties sharing the vote out fairly evenly it was possible for Labour to be 2% "ahead" in the polls with as little as 25% of the vote (Opinium, July 2019).
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
lol.
A good example of what I was posting about earlier. WFH changes everything.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
lol.
A good example of what I was posting about earlier. WFH changes everything.
very amusing, a little bit of poetic license I think.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
Yep. "I didn't get where I am today, Reggie, by not looking busy when I'm not busy."
And kl4's post triggers a related thought. The chap who gets fired, can't face telling the wife and so disappears in work clobber from the house every day, M to F, 08 to 18 hours. Won't be able to do that now with WFH. He'll be stuck with the exact problem we're thinking has otherwise disappeared, except he'll be faced with it at home which is possibly even worse.
Off topic (but thanks to David for another thoughtful article), I see Joe Biden has drifted out to 1.9 on Betfair. I can't see any justification for this in the polls so presumably punters are using their intuition. Nothing wrong with that but the polls cannot be lightly dismissed and Joe's price is starting to look serious value to me.
I accept the Stodge thesis, derived from forensic work on the cross-tables, that Biden appears to be stacking up votes in areas where they don't do him much good (because he will either win or lose heavily there anyway.) What convinces me that Joe should still be solid favorite is that he is still maintaining a strong lead in Philadelphia. Nate Silver's 'snake' is a useful graphic illustration of just how vital that State is to both candidates.
Penn State polls show a pretty consistent Biden lead, currently 4.7 points on the RCP average. I would watch that closely and continue taking the 10/11 JB as long as it stays above 3.
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
I go out for my lunch hour now as its nice to get out and get some fresh air. I go sit in a cafe outdoors have a coffee, a leisurely meal watch the world go buy and still spend half the amount I would have spent on the commute.
Back in the office days it was instant coffee from the kettle and a packed lunch eaten at my desk as commute money eat to much of my living on money.
Yeah, this is broadly the biggest change I've experienced - at least 1, if not 2 hours at lunch, matched by an 0600 start. Put in a good morning and the rest of the day writes itself.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
Yeah, well, work martyrs are another of my pet hates. My menagerie is bursting!
My local gym was doing outdoor, spaced out, sessions from early June. One of them at lunch, sit on the square with a sarnie, let's see what the mouth breathers in the department have dropped in my inbox over lunchtime.
Off topic (but thanks to David for another thoughtful article), I see Joe Biden has drifted out to 1.9 on Betfair. I can't see any justification for this in the polls so presumably punters are using their intuition. Nothing wrong with that but the polls cannot be lightly dismissed and Joe's price is starting to look serious value to me.
I accept the Stodge thesis, derived from forensic work on the cross-tables, that Biden appears to be stacking up votes in areas where they don't do him much good (because he will either win or lose heavily there anyway.) What convinces me that Joe should still be solid favorite is that he is still maintaining a strong lead in Philadelphia. Nate Silver's 'snake' is a useful graphic illustration of just how vital that State is to both candidates.
Penn State polls show a pretty consistent Biden lead, currently 4.7 points on the RCP average. I would watch that closely and continue taking the 10/11 JB as long as it stays above 3.
Unless I'm missing some news somewhere....
Dems are 1.85 so that is quite a spread between a Dem win and a Biden win.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
So so so so true.
I was always terrible at that, which is one of the reasons I love working from home.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
So so so so true.
I was always terrible at that, which is one of the reasons I love working from home.
Back to Corona :-) This is something I have been cogitating for the last couple of weeks, and would like the opinion of NigelB or Foxy or anyone else with a better biology background than me.
In the last couple of months we have seen big increases in the number of cases of SARS-COV2 in some countries, but the level of severe illness is much lower than expected, as measured by hospitalisations and deaths. There was speculation in the spring that the virus would not spread as quickly in summer as colds and flu are strongly seasonal. But it seems that the spread of the SARS-COV2 virus has little to do with the season.
Is it at all plausible though, that these seasonal illness viruses still spread at a similar rate but less frequently appears as an illness? It is possible that the human body is under less stress in summer and more stress in winter, due to lots of reasons: not moving from cold to warm environments several times a day, not inhailing air under 10 degrees, generally getting more exercise, sunlight and fresh air etc. If the body or in particular the immune system is under more stress then an onslaught from a virus is more likely to develop into illness.
Is it plausible that catching the virus is just as easy in summer, but this developing into a serious disease is much lower in summer and higher in winter? For most other Rhino/Corona/Flu viruses there is as good as no testing of the prevelance of the virus in the general population, so we do not really appreciate how widley cold viruses are spread in summer, and only if the immune system is under some other kind of stress does this develop into a "summer cold" which are ususally not as heavy as a winter cold.
I'm nowhere near an expert, but can't it be explained by the age profile of those infected being significantly younger, and nothing to do with transmission is summer vs. winter?
The reduction in fatality rate may be caused by the death of what is bleakly called 'dry tinder' in the spring/early summer. Frail, very old, major complications, often in care homes and so on. To be blunt they possibly only had months to live. Obviously not very nice to think in these stark terms, but it may be the medical reality.
Not very accurate though. The actuaries believe that the mean loss of years of Covid-19 victims was 10 years. Certainly my seventy something friend who died in March was otherwise well and could have expected a decade or more with her grandchildren.
Should people on chemo have the flu vaccine and the corona one when it’s available or is it an individual thing?
I really don't know. Probably best to discuss with your oncologist.
Off topic (but thanks to David for another thoughtful article), I see Joe Biden has drifted out to 1.9 on Betfair. I can't see any justification for this in the polls so presumably punters are using their intuition. Nothing wrong with that but the polls cannot be lightly dismissed and Joe's price is starting to look serious value to me.
I accept the Stodge thesis, derived from forensic work on the cross-tables, that Biden appears to be stacking up votes in areas where they don't do him much good (because he will either win or lose heavily there anyway.) What convinces me that Joe should still be solid favorite is that he is still maintaining a strong lead in Philadelphia. Nate Silver's 'snake' is a useful graphic illustration of just how vital that State is to both candidates.
Penn State polls show a pretty consistent Biden lead, currently 4.7 points on the RCP average. I would watch that closely and continue taking the 10/11 JB as long as it stays above 3.
Unless I'm missing some news somewhere....
Higher black turnout in Philadelphia and Detroit due to BLM and a tiny swing amongst the white working class from Trump relative to 2016 should see Biden pick up Pennsylvania and Michigan in my view but Trump should hold Wisconsin which has no major city and a below average African American population.
Who are all these WFH people who are going into town for their lunch? I, like I suspect the vast majority, just go into the kitchen to make a sandwich and dip into the fruit bowl.
Where do you buy your ingredients for the sandwich and the fruit? From shops in your market town whereas before you would not have needed to buy lunch for the week from there as you would have bought lunch in the city centre
Tesco
Your market town Tesco, not the city centre Tesco
Well I live within the Newcastle city limits. Not exactly a “market town”.
So suburbia at most, again not Newcastle city centre.
Though if you did not commute into Newcastle city centre pre lockdown it made no difference to you anyway
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
lol.
A good example of what I was posting about earlier. WFH changes everything.
kinabalu, if you have not already done so, you should read some of Amy Edmondson's works on not just the stress cost, but the cost to the organization in terms of work lost, by people spending much of their time pretending and defending rather than doing and improving.
Ed: She calls it psychological safety in the workplace
The weather's gone from unbearably hot to bloody freezing in the space of a couple of weeks.
I'm not sure where you're writing from, but it's about 15°C here in Herts and in no way could that be described as "freezing." It probably only feels like it because, as you note, we were only recently being roasted to death. Mercifully it looks like that's over for the year.
Should people on chemo have the flu vaccine and the corona one when it’s available or is it an individual thing?
One would've assumed that anyone sick or vulnerable enough to go on the shielding list would be near the front of the queue for vaccines, along with the elderly.
The weather's gone from unbearably hot to bloody freezing in the space of a couple of weeks.
I'm not sure where you're writing from, but it's about 15°C here in Herts and in no way could that be described as "freezing." It probably only feels like it because, as you note, we were only recently being roasted to death. Mercifully it looks like that's over for the year.
Should people on chemo have the flu vaccine and the corona one when it’s available or is it an individual thing?
One would've assumed that anyone sick or vulnerable enough to go on the shielding list would be near the front of the queue for vaccines, along with the elderly.
I’m worried about the reduced immunology that can be a side effect of chemo, which might be a problem with a vaccine.
Personally, I find I work far better at an office than at home. I get far too easily distracted at home.
Which is why many people want to work at home - so they can do other things while being paid to work.
You are either stupid or just being obtuse, if you are not doing the work you would not last long.
In my experience people who like homeworking tend to be from the poles - either they want to get their work done with maximum efficiency or they want to skive. While the mass in the middle, who are neither shirkers nor super-productive, but will do some work then stare into space or talk with colleagues for ten minutes, then do some more work like the office.
An important point to note is that WFH removes from working life one of its greatest and most damaging sources of negative stress - the need to pretend you are busy in an office when you are not.
That's such a weird one, a consensual lie that even quite senior manager buy into. Pretty sure that some are so addicted to it that their negative feelings towards WFH are based mainly on frustration in not being able to indulge their taste for it. i derive a not insignificant amount of pleasure knowing that the thought of thousands of employees sitting around not looking busy is gnawing at their guts.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
lol.
A good example of what I was posting about earlier. WFH changes everything.
kinabalu, if you have not already done so, you should read some of Amy Edmondson's works on not just the stress cost, but the cost to the organization in terms of work lost, by people spending much of their time pretending and defending rather than doing and improving.
Ed: She calls it psychological safety in the workplace
I think good employers like mine realise people don't work 100% of the time every day, total output is the key thing, not the time it is done in
If you're WFH and aren't busy, go for a walk, go for a run, so much better health-wise I am sure
Or take a nap. Stress level drops dramatically.
I actually remember once a comedian (maybe it was Frankie Boyle) saying the best think about working from home was the feeling of triumph when you could have sex (with others or alone) on company time.
"The betting markets have moved decisively in the wake of the convention. The Democratic challenger, Joe Biden, was the clear favourite going into it, but most bookies now have the two candidates level-pegging at 10/11. You can still find Trump at evens in one or two places, though you have to look hard to find the price.
The same is true on Betfair, where Trump’s implied probability of victory enjoyed an eight-point, convention-driven bump, surging from 41 per cent to 49 per cent. That’s a record."
Comments
It's not clear I was wrong. There may be great qualities of vision and leadership there, some integrity, a real strength of character and an implacable sense of purpose, but if so we await its unveiling.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
As far as the present coronavirus is concerned, by far the largest statistical effects are the massive increase in testing, which is picking up a far greater proportion of those infected but suffering only mild or no symptoms, and the change in age profile of those infected, with a much larger proportion of younger people (the second, of course, may be to some extent an artefact of the first).
There are definitely seasonal effects - increase in summer vitamin D levels; better ventilation as people leave windows open; more outdoor activity - but COVID doesn’t seem to be a seasonal disease in the same way flu certainly is (though even that varies across the globe).
In short, it’s complicated, and there isn’t a strong scientific consensus.
...And as far as rhonivuruses are concerned, you might well be closer to the mark.
Better scenery in Ayrshire than Devon? Away with yer....
Though if anyone had adopted the overlong and convoluted sentencing structure of a victorian, albeit without the vocabulary, I'd have put money on it being me.
Did people not have other things to worry about in the 1920s?
About the only good thing about the execrable Penny Dreadful: City of Angels is the depiction of said period.
[Though the weather wasn't the main reason my time there was shit - it was professionally unsatisfying work].
But low humidity, so considering whether to carry on with painting the shed rather than reading PB.
https://twitter.com/thistlejohn/status/1299654110594166785?s=20
https://neddonovan.substack.com/p/the-only-land-without-laws
Why don't people read the label?
Does most of the population ?
American Nazis in the 1930s—The German American Bund
https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/
🙃
It has surely become clear by now to anyone with critical faculties that the single halfway respectable argument for Boris Johnson as PM is the purely negative counterfactual that the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn.
Woe is us.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53956683
The government is shitting themselves about the loss of jobs, loss of tax revenues, impact on pension funds (the biggest owners of commercial property) and the need to avoid the hollowing out of big cities. Oligarchs don’t really figure highly.
Problems were solved and ideas formulated around the coffee machines chatting the colleagues. It isn’t so creative talking over Teams or Zoom.
"I absolutely do. Dominic will sort it out for you. What do you think? He's the best at advice"
"Tí eúkolon? Tò állōi hypotíthesthai. Prime Minister"
Whilst govts shouldnt be luddites swimming against the technological tide they absolutely should try to manage and slow down the transition from the status quo economy to whatever the new one becomes.
A COUPLE forced to work from home has each realised that the other one’s claims to have a punishingly hard job are bullshit.
Clare said: “I’ve kept telling Tom to push for a promotion because the way he talked up work, he should be on six figures. After one day watching him in action I think he should be fired
Back in the office days it was instant coffee from the kettle and a packed lunch eaten at my desk as commute money eat to much of my living on money.
A good example of what I was posting about earlier. WFH changes everything.
And kl4's post triggers a related thought. The chap who gets fired, can't face telling the wife and so disappears in work clobber from the house every day, M to F, 08 to 18 hours. Won't be able to do that now with WFH. He'll be stuck with the exact problem we're thinking has otherwise disappeared, except he'll be faced with it at home which is possibly even worse.
I accept the Stodge thesis, derived from forensic work on the cross-tables, that Biden appears to be stacking up votes in areas where they don't do him much good (because he will either win or lose heavily there anyway.) What convinces me that Joe should still be solid favorite is that he is still maintaining a strong lead in Philadelphia. Nate Silver's 'snake' is a useful graphic illustration of just how vital that State is to both candidates.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/
Penn State polls show a pretty consistent Biden lead, currently 4.7 points on the RCP average. I would watch that closely and continue taking the 10/11 JB as long as it stays above 3.
Unless I'm missing some news somewhere....
I was always terrible at that, which is one of the reasons I love working from home.
Which means it comes down to Florida, again
Though if you did not commute into Newcastle city centre pre lockdown it made no difference to you anyway
"I don’t think [with] coronavirus there will be a winter wave of any substance."
https://unherd.com/thepost/prof-michael-levitt-heres-what-i-got-wrong/
Ed: She calls it psychological safety in the workplace
I actually remember once a comedian (maybe it was Frankie Boyle) saying the best think about working from home was the feeling of triumph when you could have sex (with others or alone) on company time.
The same is true on Betfair, where Trump’s implied probability of victory enjoyed an eight-point, convention-driven bump, surging from 41 per cent to 49 per cent. That’s a record."
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-odds-2020-election-rnc-bookies-biden-polls-a9694796.html
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1299684497844305920?s=09