Have the Government explained why they haven't been able to look more closely at what, say, Japan and South Korea have been doing for months, and implement similar policies here. Or explain why it wouldn't work?
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
Which it clearly is if we are once again suffering exponential growth of cases. Significantly so.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Perhaps we incarcerate everyone under 40 in butlins around the country for 9 months and let them party. Its what @Anabobazina has been arguing for though he wanted to lock up the oldies. It would probably decrease crime as well
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
It would, but AFAIK it is still the same deadly strain. We have got better at treating the disease. If you go into hospital with it you are less likely to die. (Which is why the early lockdown countries made the right call. Even if the virus picks up again everywhere, those countries will still see less death over the whole epidemic).
Edit - to your point - hospitalisations are not increasing just yet because this is a younger demographic. Expect them to increase shortly as in France and I think now, Scotland?
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
If the virus is currently circulating mainly within the young, its perhaps not surprising that hospitalisations aren't occuring. The question is whether its possible to prevent that circulation within the young from becoming a circulation within the rest of the general population and ultimately the elderly.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object, Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother has Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
You've still steadfastly ignored the question of how the UK can have control of its borders, a fundamental objective of Brexit, if it doesn't actually intend to make any attempt to control the border with Ireland, whether at the actual border, or in the Irish Sea. Apparently border control is absolutely fundamental, except when it isn't.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object, Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother has Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
You've still steadfastly ignored the question of how the UK can have control of its borders, a fundamental objective of Brexit, if it doesn't actually intend to make any attempt to control the border with Ireland, whether at the actual border, or in the Irish Sea. Apparently border control is absolutely fundamental, except when it isn't.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Perhaps we incarcerate everyone under 40 in butlins around the country for 9 months and let them party. Its what @Anabobazina has been arguing for though he wanted to lock up the oldies. It would probably decrease crime as well
Your moronic misrepresentations are sadly an occupational hazard of being on here. I am simply arguing for a risk segmentation approach, whereby those who are more at risk (elderly, obese, infirm) are shielded.
Arguably a better contribution to the debate than your absurd rantings.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
It would, but AFAIK it is still the same deadly strain. We have got better at treating the disease. If you go into hospital with it you are less likely to die. (Which is why the early lockdown countries made the right call. Even if the virus picks up again everywhere, those countries will still see less death over the whole epidemic)
Not a huge amount of benefit if we are still taking counter COVID measures, at huge economic and non-COVID related health costs, on the basis that it is as deadly as it always was.
We have quite a happy relationship with the US in that each country believes it runs a surplus with the other. It is also an enormous trading relationship on a scale completely different from that with Eire.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Perhaps we incarcerate everyone under 40 in butlins around the country for 9 months and let them party. Its what @Anabobazina has been arguing for though he wanted to lock up the oldies. It would probably decrease crime as well
Your moronic misrepresentations are sadly an occupational hazard of being on here. I am simply arguing for a risk segmentation approach, whereby those who are more at risk (elderly, obese, infirm) are shielded.
Arguably a better contribution to the debate than your absurd rantings.
You are asking for segmentation, the only difference between my suggestion and yours is who you want to sequester
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
If the virus is currently circulating mainly within the young, its perhaps not surprising that hospitalisations aren't occuring. The question is whether its possible to prevent that circulation within the young from becoming a circulation within the rest of the general population and ultimately the elderly.
Shield the elderly until we know!
Given it’s that or closing down the economy -again - I see few other sensible strategies.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object, Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother has Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
You've still steadfastly ignored the question of how the UK can have control of its borders, a fundamental objective of Brexit, if it doesn't actually intend to make any attempt to control the border with Ireland, whether at the actual border, or in the Irish Sea. Apparently border control is absolutely fundamental, except when it isn't.
It will have control over its border with the Republic of Ireland in GB but not NI which remains part of the UK, NI will have no border with GB or the Republic under the Boris plan
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Perhaps we incarcerate everyone under 40 in butlins around the country for 9 months and let them party. Its what @Anabobazina has been arguing for though he wanted to lock up the oldies. It would probably decrease crime as well
Your moronic misrepresentations are sadly an occupational hazard of being on here. I am simply arguing for a risk segmentation approach, whereby those who are more at risk (elderly, obese, infirm) are shielded.
Arguably a better contribution to the debate than your absurd rantings.
You are asking for segmentation, the only difference between my suggestion and yours is who you want to sequester
I’m not suggesting locking anybody up, which is what you accused me of.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
That`s why I added the rider that hospitalisations are not increasing. The point I`m making is that if the virus has mutated into a less serious strain the fact that more people are catching it with no or very little ill-effects and hospitalisation rates are not increasing then does it matter?
It would, but AFAIK it is still the same deadly strain. We have got better at treating the disease. If you go into hospital with it you are less likely to die. (Which is why the early lockdown countries made the right call. Even if the virus picks up again everywhere, those countries will still see less death over the whole epidemic).
Edit - to your point - hospitalisations are not increasing just yet because this is a younger demographic. Expect them to increase shortly as in France and I think now, Scotland?
There has been an uptick in hospitalisations and ICU admissions in Scotland but from a vanishingly small base. Nothing like the peak to date, not even close.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object, Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother has Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
You've still steadfastly ignored the question of how the UK can have control of its borders, a fundamental objective of Brexit, if it doesn't actually intend to make any attempt to control the border with Ireland, whether at the actual border, or in the Irish Sea. Apparently border control is absolutely fundamental, except when it isn't.
It will have control over its border with the Republic of Ireland in GB but not NI which remains part of the UK, NI will have no border with GB or the Republic under the Boris plan
And the truck that engages in the cunning ruse of driving across the border between the Republic and the North before turning right?
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
Project Moonshot is I guess the only way Bozza can see all his progeny on Christmas Day.
Alternatively he could grow a fucking backbone, sack Hancock, Whitty and Vallance, and start to treat the country like grown ups.
The thing that gets me about today`s tightening in restrictions is that R is thought to be at 1. Therefore the virus isn`t increasing in prevalance. The increase in infections must - I think - therefore be due to testing finding a higher proportion of infected people, perhaps because testing rates are skewed toward problem areas of the country. (Unless R is, in fact, higher than 1.)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Well, if it is more than 1, but the majority of cases are not being picked up because there are no/only mild symptoms and so are unreported AND hospitalisations are not rising then does is matter?
This could develop into a key question over then next few weeks. (I know hospitalisations increased last week, but from a very low base after months of dramatic falls.)
The issue is that younger people who are now infecting each other with enthusiasm do in fact live with older people who will get the infections next and are more likely to die or become seriously ill.
Perhaps we incarcerate everyone under 40 in butlins around the country for 9 months and let them party. Its what @Anabobazina has been arguing for though he wanted to lock up the oldies. It would probably decrease crime as well
Your moronic misrepresentations are sadly an occupational hazard of being on here. I am simply arguing for a risk segmentation approach, whereby those who are more at risk (elderly, obese, infirm) are shielded.
Arguably a better contribution to the debate than your absurd rantings.
You are asking for segmentation, the only difference between my suggestion and yours is who you want to sequester
I’m not suggesting locking anybody up, which is what you accused me of.
You suggested they shouldnt leave their homes or have contact with anyone under 50 how is that not suggesting locking them up? At least with my suggestion the under 40's could still socialise whereas with yours older people are confined to their homes unable to see anyone and just the tv for company
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object, Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother has Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
You've still steadfastly ignored the question of how the UK can have control of its borders, a fundamental objective of Brexit, if it doesn't actually intend to make any attempt to control the border with Ireland, whether at the actual border, or in the Irish Sea. Apparently border control is absolutely fundamental, except when it isn't.
It will have control over its border with the Republic of Ireland in GB but not NI which remains part of the UK, NI will have no border with GB or the Republic under the Boris plan
And the truck that engages in the cunning ruse of driving across the border between the Republic and the North before turning right?
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Who cares? Really. Who gives a tiny fucklet?
There is zero evidence a US/UK FTA will happen anytime soon anyway. Right now both sides can claim a trade surplus (as DavidL says). So it doesn't matter. After this confected row, the Irish will be publicly happy that America has "defended" the Old Country, America and the UK can look at the stats and quietly conclude that Sod all has changed anyway.
Status quo ante. This is all posturing. But if America - a fast declining, politically roiled ex-hegemon which will soon need its friends - REALLY wants to antagonise the UK, one of its best and most important friends, then so be it.
Fact is, America is no longer the unipolar power which can blithely afford to alienate anyone significant.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Bonus is we could save on all the hassle of a customs border at Dover as well! Oh, except there was that ad a couple of weeks ago about the UK "growing" the Customs sector and advertising for jobs.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Who cares? Really. Who gives a tiny fucklet?
There is zero evidence a US/UK FTA will happen anytime soon anyway. Right now both sides can claim a trade surplus (as DavidL says). So it doesn't matter. After this confected row, the Irish will be publicly happy that America has "defended" the Old Country, America and the UK can look at the stats and quietly conclude that Sod all has changed anyway.
Status quo ante. This is all posturing. But if America - a fast declining, politically roiled ex-hegemon which will soon need its friends - REALLY wants to antagonise the UK, one of its best and most important friends, then so be it.
Fact is, America is no longer the unipolar power which can blithely afford to alienate anyone significant.
No but the Irish will rope in the Americans as well as the EU to try and exert maximum pressure on us
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
One assumes from your avatar, Philip, that you rather like the idea of smuggling.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Who cares? Really. Who gives a tiny fucklet?
There is zero evidence a US/UK FTA will happen anytime soon anyway. Right now both sides can claim a trade surplus (as DavidL says). So it doesn't matter. After this confected row, the Irish will be publicly happy that America has "defended" the Old Country, America and the UK can look at the stats and quietly conclude that Sod all has changed anyway.
Status quo ante. This is all posturing. But if America - a fast declining, politically roiled ex-hegemon which will soon need its friends - REALLY wants to antagonise the UK, one of its best and most important friends, then so be it.
Fact is, America is no longer the unipolar power which can blithely afford to alienate anyone significant.
No but the Irish will rope in the Americans as well as the EU to try and exert maximum pressure on us
And who cares? Trade is trade. After a few weeks of wanking on, everyone will want to get back to business. Not least because we are all going to be much poorer after the Plague, and desperate to make money.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Bonus is we could save on all the hassle of a customs border at Dover as well! Oh, except there was that ad a couple of weeks ago about the UK "growing" the Customs sector and advertising for jobs.
Why would we not bother with Dover? That is where the bulk of the trade goes through and it doesn't have the Irish complication.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Bonus is we could save on all the hassle of a customs border at Dover as well! Oh, except there was that ad a couple of weeks ago about the UK "growing" the Customs sector and advertising for jobs.
Why would we not bother with Dover? That is where the bulk of the trade goes through and it doesn't have the Irish complication.
You were the one who declared yourself entirely relaxed with a bit of smuggling. You don't think that the amount of smuggling through the Irish backdoor might increase if it became apparent that we were going to make no effort to police it whatsoever? I'm not even sure it could be called smuggling in those circumstances. Proper smugglers might not see it as much of a challenge.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Indeed.
Incidentally, I don't think the general public understand this sufficiently either.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Trump I doubt could give a toss about the GFA and he gets on personally with Boris and hates the EU. So if he is re elected it will not be a great issue on his side.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Who cares? Really. Who gives a tiny fucklet?
There is zero evidence a US/UK FTA will happen anytime soon anyway. Right now both sides can claim a trade surplus (as DavidL says). So it doesn't matter. After this confected row, the Irish will be publicly happy that America has "defended" the Old Country, America and the UK can look at the stats and quietly conclude that Sod all has changed anyway.
Status quo ante. This is all posturing. But if America - a fast declining, politically roiled ex-hegemon which will soon need its friends - REALLY wants to antagonise the UK, one of its best and most important friends, then so be it.
Fact is, America is no longer the unipolar power which can blithely afford to alienate anyone significant.
No but the Irish will rope in the Americans as well as the EU to try and exert maximum pressure on us
But of course, young HY! Anybody would do that. After all, your Johnson, Cummings and the rest of the third-rate Cabinet have deliberately set out to antagonise the whole world against us. Why on earth woud they not team up together to extract their vengeance.
It is the stupid UKIP-Conservatives who have sown the wind. You must stand by to reap the consequences.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Bonus is we could save on all the hassle of a customs border at Dover as well! Oh, except there was that ad a couple of weeks ago about the UK "growing" the Customs sector and advertising for jobs.
Why would we not bother with Dover? That is where the bulk of the trade goes through and it doesn't have the Irish complication.
You were the one who declared yourself entirely relaxed with a bit of smuggling. You don't think that the amount of smuggling through the Irish backdoor might increase if it became apparent that we were going to make no effort to police it whatsoever? I'm not even sure it could be called smuggling in those circumstances. Proper smugglers might not see it as much of a challenge.
You do not need a wall to stop all smuggling, you balance risks.
At the minute people can smuggle alcohol from France to the UK, do we inspect every single car that goes from France to the UK to prevent it? No, we accept the risk.
If we are worried about fraud in other walks of life do we have the Government inspect everything that we do?
There is no reason why we can not rely upon a combination of requiring self-declaration plus evidence-based risk-based investigations for fraud and punishment of people who commit fraud.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
One assumes from your avatar, Philip, that you rather like the idea of smuggling.
He glories in being a lawless pirate. It's a real turn-on for him.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Well, in that case it is not exponential, it is geometric. I did not do geometric in the example
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Unless we leave the WTO we would have to abolish our borders with other countries too.
So this is another pollster with swing state polls at the same time as national polls which is nice as we can see where they put Biden's EC handicap. They have PA as the tipping point at +4, so +2, slightly better than Hillary's +3.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Unless we leave the WTO we would have to abolish our borders with other countries too.
A strange form of taking back control.
That's not true. The security implications for Ireland mean that we can use alternative arrangements for Ireland - we would still be charging customs just relying upon self-declaration which is how most already get charged anyway.
Anyone who deliberately commits fraud can be prosecuted - same as any other fraudster.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Unless we leave the WTO we would have to abolish our borders with other countries too.
A strange form of taking back control.
To be fair, i'm pretty sure we could amend the WTO treaties in UK law to give the desired level of border control.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
If we want no Irish land or sea customs border, it is easy. We just need to sign up for Customs Union and alignment on food, agricultural and other standards.
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
There is a fourth option.
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Unless we leave the WTO we would have to abolish our borders with other countries too.
A strange form of taking back control.
To be fair, i'm pretty sure we could amend the WTO treaties in UK law to give the desired level of border control.
The world needs English law more than we need the world.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
The point is the government don't want the numbers going up and up. They want the numbers going down (or will settle at least for a plateau), which is why they're taking the (supposedly and hopefully) preventative actions that they are taking now. To get the numbers going down they need to get the R below 1.
If you lock down some stuff piecemeal and limit some freedoms piecemeal and the R is still above 1 the numbers continue to go up and up, except you've pissed off people and you're still screwing your economy up, so you've lost on all 3 fronts. All you will have done is slow the rate at which cases are going up, but that's not enough over the longer period, because it's still exponential, it just means you have big numbers in 5 or 6 weeks instead of 2 or whatever.
If you're going to piss people off and screw up your economy you might as well do it in a way that gets the R below 1, and as I said before it needed the lockdowniest lockdown (UK version) we had before to get it just a bit below 1. So I'm not really sure tinkering round the edges like this works in the long run, other than as a way of softening folk up for going back into full lockdown.
Whilst I am sure she is genuine and probably also correct on the substantive issue, she is talking bull with that last comment about the GFA being treasured by the American people. The vast majority will ever even have heard of the GFA let alone have an opinion on it.
This is a matter purely for political geeks. Unfortunately she is absolutely right that those geeks are sitting in Congress, do understand the issues and will be extremely pissed by the actions of the UK in reneging on an international treaty - particularly one involving Ireland.
Fuck em. In the end we can say to the USA - is Ireland that important you would sacrifice you trading/military/intel/cultural relations with the UK, for a shamrock?
If they say Yes, then let them Go Fish in the Shannon. So be it. We leave NATO, Five Eyes, and the rest. With all that means for the USA.
If not, then let them be silent, on this.
It's time for Britain to assume its rightful place in the world, no higher than it should be, but no lower, either. We are a major yet secondary power, we are entitled to our independence. The Yanks can do one, if they seek to bully us,
Leaving NATO and agreeing a security alliance with Russia would shake up the world order.
Well
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
The point is the government don't want the numbers going up and up. They want the numbers going down (or will settle at least for a plateau), which is why they're taking the (supposedly and hopefully) preventative actions that they are taking now. To get the numbers going down they need to get the R below 1.
If you lock down some stuff piecemeal and limit some freedoms piecemeal and the R is still above 1 the numbers continue to go up and up, except you've pissed off people and you're still screwing your economy up, so you've lost on all 3 fronts. All you will have done is slow the rate at which cases are going up, but that's not enough over the longer period, because it's still exponential, it just means you have big numbers in 5 or 6 weeks instead of 2 or whatever.
If you're going to piss people off and screw up your economy you might as well do it in a way that gets the R below 1, and as I said before it needed the lockdowniest lockdown (UK version) we had before to get it just a bit below 1. So I'm not really sure tinkering round the edges like this works in the long run, other than as a way of softening folk up for going back into full lockdown.
If you can keep R around 1 then Track & Trace etc can keep this under control, which further keeps R down.
Has anyone asked the question about whether the powers granted to ministers under the Internal Markets Law are a massive increase in Executive power over the legislature. How much of the rules over state aid are currently governed by Statute, and does this bill allow existing statute to be over-riden without Parliamentary oversight? And just in Northern Ireland, or extending to the whole UK?
(After all if the alleged argument was that the EU was intending to exploit restrictions on State Aid in Northern Ireland to impose restrictions in the wider UK, doesn't the reverse apply? Ministers could use the powers to employ massive State Aid in Northern Ireland to benefit companies across the UK.)
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
The point is the government don't want the numbers going up and up. They want the numbers going down (or will settle at least for a plateau), which is why they're taking the (supposedly and hopefully) preventative actions that they are taking now. To get the numbers going down they need to get the R below 1.
If you lock down some stuff piecemeal and limit some freedoms piecemeal and the R is still above 1 the numbers continue to go up and up, except you've pissed off people and you're still screwing your economy up, so you've lost on all 3 fronts. All you will have done is slow the rate at which cases are going up, but that's not enough over the longer period, because it's still exponential, it just means you have big numbers in 5 or 6 weeks instead of 2 or whatever.
If you're going to piss people off and screw up your economy you might as well do it in a way that gets the R below 1, and as I said before it needed the lockdowniest lockdown (UK version) we had before to get it just a bit below 1. So I'm not really sure tinkering round the edges like this works in the long run, other than as a way of softening folk up for going back into full lockdown.
If you can keep R around 1 then Track & Trace etc can keep this under control, which further keeps R down.
Track and trace is already a thing, so I think it's already an input to the R number that we're talking about decreasing? Or is it currently disfunctional???
It's entirely possible that President Trump will be POTUS, but will have a Democratic Senate to contend with.
And even if the Republicans hold onto the Senate and the Presidency this time around, they're not going to have much fun in 2022 when North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin all have Republican Senators up for re-election. (Conversely, if Biden takes the White House this time around, those Senators will probably be safe.)
So those 20 names probably shouldn't get too excited just yet.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Well, in that case it is not exponential, it is geometric. I did not do geometric in the example
Of course it's not exponential. Exponential is an appallingly misused word.
Can you even think of an infection model with e^n growth? How would that even work?
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
Every household, every week normally. For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
Every household, every week normally. For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
Have we done this thing about Biden doing better with likely voters than registered voters? Definitely not what I was expecting, seems like a big deal:
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
Every household, every week normally. For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
A week ago the figure was 18.4 million. 1.6 million recoveries in 7 days is pretty encouraging. Also the percentage of recoveries is rising all the time.
Have we done this thing about Biden doing better with likely voters than registered voters? Definitely not what I was expecting, seems like a big deal:
The pattern last time wasn't consistent but Clinton sometimes did better among likely voters too.
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
Every household, every week normally. For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
Makes sense to me, what's the catch?
It costs £100bn.
UK GDP is like £3000bn, I think it's obviously worth 1/30 of GDP to be able to start operating the economy normally?
The USA used to be able to count about 98% of its votes on election night AFAIK. Why did so many states decide to change that? It might have been better if they hadn't, especially with the type of contest we're likely to have this year.
Have we done this thing about Biden doing better with likely voters than registered voters? Definitely not what I was expecting, seems like a big deal:
The pattern last time wasn't consistent but Clinton sometimes did better among likely voters too.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Well, in that case it is not exponential, it is geometric. I did not do geometric in the example
Of course it's not exponential. Exponential is an appallingly misused word.
Can you even think of an infection model with e^n growth? How would that even work?
Geometric and exponential are effectively the same thing. A geometric function is just a case of an exponential function with a discrete integer exponent (counting individual time periods or steps).
In this case the exponent is a count of characteristic time periods (the generation time) so it could be described as geometric.
n(t) = n(0) * R^t
That doesn't work for very long though as obviously R changes as the proportion of immune people increases.
Anyway, it isn't (1000^1.2)^1.2, it is 1000 * (1.2^2), so 1440 is correct.
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
Every household, every week normally. For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
Makes sense to me, what's the catch?
It costs £100bn.
UK GDP is like £3000bn, I think it's obviously worth 1/30 of GDP to be able to start operating the economy normally?
But not all economic activity has stopped. What fraction would it enable is the question.
Then you've got whatever proportion of GDP you lost, half of which would normally go to the government, and then all the impossible-to-calculate future costs like how much dumber the kids are going to get if they keep having to be kept away from school.
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Well, in that case it is not exponential, it is geometric. I did not do geometric in the example
Of course it's not exponential. Exponential is an appallingly misused word.
Can you even think of an infection model with e^n growth? How would that even work?
Geometric and exponential are effectively the same thing. A geometric function is just a case of an exponential function with a discrete integer exponent (counting individual time periods or steps).
In this case the exponent is a count of characteristic time periods (the generation time) so it could be described as geometric.
n(t) = n(0) * R^t
That doesn't work for very long though as obviously R changes as the proportion of immune people increases.
Anyway, it isn't (1000^1.2)^1.2, it is 1000 * (1.2^2), so 1440 is correct.
"The licence fee is “morally on the way out” and the BBC should be required to make much of its money through optional subscriptions, the chairman of the culture select committee said.
Julian Knight, the Conservative MP, said the corporation’s sprawling size had done lasting damage to the media industry, arguing that commercial publishers could not compete with the “behemoth” BBC website." (£)
We were being told repeatedly at the end of the 12 week lockdown when the numbers were finally bottoming out because the country had all stayed indoors and only ventured out for food that R was still around 0.9. It never really got much less than that, nationally at least (regionally it might have been a bit lower).
There's no way it's not more than 1 now, not with the attempts in the last couple of months to try and have most things opened up again.
And ultimately 1.1, 1.5, does it make much difference? They're still exponential growth, just different speeds.
Yes, it makes a HUGE difference.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks 1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
Whoah.
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
Well, in that case it is not exponential, it is geometric. I did not do geometric in the example
Of course it's not exponential. Exponential is an appallingly misused word.
Can you even think of an infection model with e^n growth? How would that even work?
"The licence fee is “morally on the way out” and the BBC should be required to make much of its money through optional subscriptions, the chairman of the culture select committee said.
Julian Knight, the Conservative MP, said the corporation’s sprawling size had done lasting damage to the media industry, arguing that commercial publishers could not compete with the “behemoth” BBC website." (£)
They badly screwed up not making iPlayer a subscription service. It could have been a globally-accessed sub service like Netflix. A terrible, terrible, terrible error of judgement.
It's a grim day in the virus news tbh. The Daily Express has done its valiant best to cheerlead a national Boris orgasm but facts have swept all unfettered optimism aside.
Boris Johnson believes a mass testing programme is “our only hope for avoiding a second national lockdown before a vaccine”, according to leaked official documents setting out plans for “Operation Moonshot”.
They are all NASA obsessed boomers aren't they?
Mission control and now Moonshot, FFS...
The cost estimate looks way too high. A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less). 10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
IDK, I think there are some companies that say they want to make these things, it should be dead easy to test them and did doesn't matter if they're a little bit wrong, and there's no computer program involved that ministers can somehow bollocks up. If the government's role is to promise to pay for them if somebody can make them and harrass the regulators into giving them permission that sounds like the sort of thing the British government can handle, even this one.
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
The Harvard guy is offering a royalty free license to anyone who wants to make it.
The ‘moonshot’ thing from what I can gather from news reports involves our starting from scratch. ‘Manhattan program’ is another phrase used. I’m not enormously confident in governments ability to deliver this quickly, at an affordable cost, as their clever idea seems to be throwing as much money as they can at the problem.
A week ago the figure was 18.4 million. 1.6 million recoveries in 7 days is pretty encouraging. Also the percentage of recoveries is rising all the time.
In Houston over the last two months the hospital fatality rate has gone from 6% overall to 10.5%
Comments
Sorry, thought we were back on Brexit.
Congress however is a different matter, Pelosi will certainly veto any trade deal which does not protect the GFA and even if the GOP regained Congress plenty of GOP Congressmen would object too. Biden winning the presidency and the Democrats holding the House means any US and UK FTA is dead in the water from January, the US will focus on an EU FTA instead. Biden's mother had Irish heritage too.
In reality of course Boris simply wants no border in the Irish Sea to match no border in Ireland but the Democrats in particular seem to think not having a border in the Irish Sea breaches the GFA
Edit - to your point - hospitalisations are not increasing just yet because this is a younger demographic. Expect them to increase shortly as in France and I think now, Scotland?
Arguably a better contribution to the debate than your absurd rantings.
Given it’s that or closing down the economy -again - I see few other sensible strategies.
1000 people with an exponential of 0.9 per week is 269 after two weeks
1000 people with an exponential of 1.1 per week is 4,266 after two weeks
1000 people with an exponential of 1.2 per week is 20,000 after two weeks
Exponentials are tricky things, and whilst the figures above are a bit back-of-the-postcard sort of thing, they do illustrate the issue
And the truck that engages in the cunning ruse of driving across the border between the Republic and the North before turning right?
A rapid antigen test, produced on a mass scale for self testing, ought to be £2-3 a pop (possibly less).
10 million every day for a year would come to about £10bn.
For example:
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/coronavirus-covid-19-press-conference-with-michael-mina-08-07-20/
The Moonshot is going to be like our world beating app, isn’t it ?
'More than 25 years ago the leading Daily Telegraph, anti-EU propagandist, Liam Halligan, shared a flat in Moscow with Dominic Cummings. It is not known what Cummings was up to, or what contacts he made. No 10 has always refused to say what vetting Cummings had to go through to get access to the highest secrets of the British state as Johnson’s closest aide...In 2012 Putin told the Russian Embassy to set up a group of MPs called “Conservative Friends of Russia”. The Russian Ambassador held a launch party in the Russian embassy attended by Carrie Symonds then a Tory party press officer now mother of Johnson’s latest baby. The former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind was conned into being president of the group. The Kremlin organised an all-expenses paid junket to Moscow and St Petersburg... On the junket was another Cummings associate, Matthew Elliot, who set up anti-European fronts before emerging as one of the chief ideologues of the Johnson-Cummings-Farage campaign for Brexit in 2016.'
https://fedtrust.co.uk/why-putin-wanted-johnson-to-win-brexit-and-end-up-in-no-10/
The cognitive disconnect that we could have no borders without this is delusional, but of course CU plus is hated by the Brexiteers because it is Mays Deal. Of course it is as a vassal state to the EU,
We have no Irish land border, no sea border, no alignment . . . and we simply live with the risk of smuggling.
Because their predictions worked out so well in the past few years.
There is zero evidence a US/UK FTA will happen anytime soon anyway. Right now both sides can claim a trade surplus (as DavidL says). So it doesn't matter. After this confected row, the Irish will be publicly happy that America has "defended" the Old Country, America and the UK can look at the stats and quietly conclude that Sod all has changed anyway.
Status quo ante. This is all posturing. But if America - a fast declining, politically roiled ex-hegemon which will soon need its friends - REALLY wants to antagonise the UK, one of its best and most important friends, then so be it.
Fact is, America is no longer the unipolar power which can blithely afford to alienate anyone significant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY-_dMpD03M
Make sure you follow the 'rule of 6'
Your math is wrong.
R is the total number of people you infect over the entire period you are infectious. If we make that one week (for simplicities sake), then in in one week an R of 1.2 means you go from 1,000 to 1,200, then to 1,440.
All sides are gesturing, pathetically.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Incidentally, I don't think the general public understand this sufficiently either.
But based on the numbers it is likely that Sunderland will have a 'local curfew' from Sat. Pubs closed from 10pm until 5am.
So if you are from Sunderland you need to get on it tomorrow and Friday.
It is the stupid UKIP-Conservatives who have sown the wind. You must stand by to reap the consequences.
The rest of us didn´t deserve this.
‘He knowingly and willingly lied’: Biden rips Trump over Woodward book revelations
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/09/biden-trump-woodward-410911
That first presidential debate is going to be interesting.
At the minute people can smuggle alcohol from France to the UK, do we inspect every single car that goes from France to the UK to prevent it? No, we accept the risk.
If we are worried about fraud in other walks of life do we have the Government inspect everything that we do?
There is no reason why we can not rely upon a combination of requiring self-declaration plus evidence-based risk-based investigations for fraud and punishment of people who commit fraud.
A strange form of taking back control.
Personally anything before 12 noon is to early for me!
Would you want to play cards with him?
Anyone who deliberately commits fraud can be prosecuted - same as any other fraudster.
If you lock down some stuff piecemeal and limit some freedoms piecemeal and the R is still above 1 the numbers continue to go up and up, except you've pissed off people and you're still screwing your economy up, so you've lost on all 3 fronts. All you will have done is slow the rate at which cases are going up, but that's not enough over the longer period, because it's still exponential, it just means you have big numbers in 5 or 6 weeks instead of 2 or whatever.
If you're going to piss people off and screw up your economy you might as well do it in a way that gets the R below 1, and as I said before it needed the lockdowniest lockdown (UK version) we had before to get it just a bit below 1. So I'm not really sure tinkering round the edges like this works in the long run, other than as a way of softening folk up for going back into full lockdown.
I'll be staying in!
(After all if the alleged argument was that the EU was intending to exploit restrictions on State Aid in Northern Ireland to impose restrictions in the wider UK, doesn't the reverse apply? Ministers could use the powers to employ massive State Aid in Northern Ireland to benefit companies across the UK.)
10 million per day feels too low though given the population? Is the thought that only places like schools get them, or do they only want to administer them like once a week?
And even if the Republicans hold onto the Senate and the Presidency this time around, they're not going to have much fun in 2022 when North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin all have Republican Senators up for re-election. (Conversely, if Biden takes the White House this time around, those Senators will probably be safe.)
So those 20 names probably shouldn't get too excited just yet.
Can you even think of an infection model with e^n growth? How would that even work?
For people in jobs where they see lots of people, every day.
And for people who have contact with someone who's been infected, then it's quarantine plus daily tests.
Put that together, and you can be 99% back to normal in a couple of weeks.
https://twitter.com/saletan/status/1303842836283117570
https://twitter.com/MeetThePress/status/778700484592840704
Googling up 2016 I got this from October, nearly all the polls show a better performance for Trump on Likely Voters, albeit not as big as a lot of GOP candidates have had:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-likely-voters-arent-helping-trump-much/
In this case the exponent is a count of characteristic time periods (the generation time) so it could be described as geometric.
n(t) = n(0) * R^t
That doesn't work for very long though as obviously R changes as the proportion of immune people increases.
Anyway, it isn't (1000^1.2)^1.2, it is 1000 * (1.2^2), so 1440 is correct.
Washington Post article 9 September on follow up survey in Bergamo, Italy.
Just easy pickings among all the shitheads here.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/sep/08/uks-public-spending-watchdog-estimates-210bn-coronavirus-bill
Then you've got whatever proportion of GDP you lost, half of which would normally go to the government, and then all the impossible-to-calculate future costs like how much dumber the kids are going to get if they keep having to be kept away from school.
Julian Knight, the Conservative MP, said the corporation’s sprawling size had done lasting damage to the media industry, arguing that commercial publishers could not compete with the “behemoth” BBC website." (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/bbc-licence-fee-on-the-way-out-says-senior-mp-8cb2vp5cc
We're imprisoned by this virus.
Until there's a vaccine.
The ‘moonshot’ thing from what I can gather from news reports involves our starting from scratch. ‘Manhattan program’ is another phrase used.
I’m not enormously confident in governments ability to deliver this quickly, at an affordable cost, as their clever idea seems to be throwing as much money as they can at the problem.
A quite astonishing rise